SADASIVAN Vs. V RADHA AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The complainant is the appellant herein. He laid a complaint alleging that the accused borrowed a sum of 2,00,000/- from the complainant on 06.05.2009 undertaking to repay it within 3 days. When the amount was demanded, the accused executed and delivered a cheque dated 12.05.2009 for 2,00,000/-. The cheque was presented for collection, but was returned dishonoured on the ground that the payment was stopped by the drawer. A statutory notice was issued to which a reply was sent. Hence the complaint was laid before the trial court.

(2.) The accused appeared and contested the proceedings by pleading not guilty. On the side of the complainant, he was examined as PW1 and Exts.P1 to P7 were marked. On the side of the accused, she got herself examined as DW2 and one witness was examined as DW1. Exts.D1 to D3 were marked on the side of the accused. The court below, on an evaluation of the entire evidence disbelieved the version of PW1 and held that the defence set up by the accused was believable by applying the principles of preponderance of probability. The accused was acquitted. This is challenged in this appeal.

(3.) Heard Smt.Shamseera C. Ashraf, learned counsel for the appellant. In spite of service of notice on the 1st respondent, she has not appeared to contest the proceedings. Examined the records.