GURU RAJENDRA MINERALS TRADING COMPANY Vs. K RAMAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and learned counsel appearing for respondent in both the cases.

(2.) The factual aspects of both the cases are similar and parties are also one and the same and nature of proceedings is one and the same. Hence, both the matters are taken up together for common disposal since question involved in both the matters is one and the same.

(3.) The present revision petitioner is the complainant before the lower Court and filed private complaints under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. against the respondent who is accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of N.I.Act. It is contended that petitioner has engaged itself in Trading Minerals like iron ore under the name and style of Sri Guru Rajendra Minerals Trading Company. The complainant contacted the respondent for supply of iron ore and as desired by the respondent, the petitioner had paid the sum of Rs.3 Crores by way of bankers cheque bearing No.120910 drawn on Bank of India dated 12.09.2008 favoring the respondent. The respondent had got encashed the cheque on 15.09.2008. Thereafter, the respondent had failed to supply iron ore as agreed. When the petitioner demanded for refund of the advance amount, the respondent had returned Rs.50 Lakhs on 05.12.2008 and another sum of Rs.50 Lakhs on 02.01.2009. Thereafter, respondent had issued two separate cheques bearing Nos.226591 and 226592 on 05.08.2009 drawn on Axis bank each for Rs.1 Crore, in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner had presented the cheques on 05.08.2009 for payment. The said cheques returned with banker's endorsement due to insufficient funds not honored. In spite of repeated request and even after issuance of legal notice, the respondent did not repay the amounts. Hence, these two complaints are filed before the lower Court. When the matter was pending before the lower Court, the respondent came forward to make the payment vide cheque dated 03.03.2011 and 08.06.2011 and thereafter the complaint is disposed directing the respondent to pay Rs.25 Lakhs as compensation, by judgment dated 18.10.2014. The complainant being aggrieved by the said judgment preferred an appeal before the III Addl. District and Sessions Judge in Criminal Appeal Nos.5014/2015 and 5015/2015. The First Appellate Court after considering the matter on merits dismissed both the appeals. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of the appeals, the revision petitioner has filed the present revision petitions before this Court.