HABEEB M S/O ABDUL MAJEED Vs. GOKULAM CHITS AND FINANCE CO PVT LTD REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision arises from the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court-III), Thiruvananthapuram in Crl. Appeal No.1022 of 2008 confirming the judgment of learned Judicial First Class Magistrate-IV, Thiruvananthapuram in S.T. No.1902 of 2007 on a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short, "the Act").

(2.) ACCORDING to the first respondent-complainant, petitioner issued Ext.P2, cheque dated 05.06.2006 for Rs.1,63,000/- for the discharge of his liability to the first respondent. Dishonour of that cheque for insufficiency of funds is proved by Ext.P3. Issue of notice to the petitioner on time intimating dishonour and demanding payment and the notice being returned as unclaimed on 24.06.2006 are proved by Exts.P4 to P6.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner has raised the same contention. But I do not find any substance in that contention. Due execution of the cheque, its dishonour for insufficiency of funds, issue of statutory notice, etc., are proved by the oral and documentary evidence. Courts below drew the presumption under Sec.139 of the Act as well to to hold that the cheque was issued for the discharge of a legally recoverable debt/liability.