THOMAS CHACKO Vs. K U MATHEW

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the complainant in C.C.No. 952 of 2001 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court - III, Punalur. The first respondent herein was the accused in that case, which was filed by the complainant alleging commission of the offence under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.

(2.) BRIEFLY the case of the appellant/complainant is as follows. The accused issued to the complainant a cheque dt.30.3.2001 for an amount of Rs.37,000/- from his account maintained at the Canara Bank, Punalur branch, in discharge of his liability towards the complainant. When the cheque was presented for incashment, it was dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the account of the accused, vide memo dt. 25.5.2001. The complainant sent a lawyer notice dt. 6.6.2001 to the accused intimating the dishonour of the cheque and demanding back the amount. But the accused did not reply any amount. Hence the complaint.

(3.) AT the time of argument, learned counsel for the appellant raised the following contentions. Learned counsel submitted that the finding of the court below that Ext.P1 cheque was obtained by the complainant as blank cheque is not based on any material evidence. The specific case of the complainant is that Ext.P1 cheque was written and signed by the accused. No contra evidence was adduced by the accused. Hence the court below erred in holding that Ext.P1 cheque was obtained as blank cheque.