MEENA TYAGI Vs. RAJINDER SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Crl.M.A.28591/2018 (Exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

(2.) Briefly, the case of the petitioner in his complaint was that the petitioner extended a friendly loan of Rs. 11.50 lakh to the respondent and in order to liquidate the liability, the respondent handed over a cheque bearing No.548947 dated 22nd October, 2010 for a sum of Rs. 11.50 lakh drawn on ICICI Bank, Sonepat Branch with the assurance that on presentation, it would be honoured. When the petitioner presented the said cheque in his bank i.e. UCO Bank, New Subzi Mandi, Azadpur Branch, it was returned with the remark 'Account Closed' vide return memo dated 8th February, 2011. The complainant thus issued a legal notice dated 20th February, 2011 and since despite service of notice the respondent did not pay the amount, the complaint was filed. During the course of trial, petitioner proved the original cheque, original cheque returning memo, deposit slip of the cheque, UPC and legal notice vide Ex.CW-1/1 to Ex.CW-1/5 respectively.

(3.) Plea of the respondent in his defence was that the cheque in question was handed over by him to one Rampal Kashyap as security and in this regard, he had made a complaint in Gannaur Police Station against Rampal Kashyap. During the course of cross-examination the petitioner admitted that she was earning a sum of Rs. 50,000/- approximately, had never paid income tax and at one go had never given loan to the accused but paid the entire sum in different instalments. She admitted that there was no written agreement between the parties. The petitioner also examined her husband as CW-2 who stated that he knew the respondent as he belonged to the same village as that of his wife, thus his wife extended the loan. According to him, she arranged the amount of Rs. 6 lakh by withdrawing from his account, Rs. 2 lakh were lying at home, Rs. 2,80,000/- were again withdrawn from his account and Rs. 70,000/- was arranged from his maternal uncle. He further stated that they had also sold some family property and thus gave the loan to the respondent. CW-2 admitted that the land sold by them was for a sum of Rs. 2.60 lakh and the remaining amount was received in cash.