MADAMUTTATHIL ABDUL RAZAK Vs. M YOUSAF

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant did not succeed in his complaint against the respondent alleging offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, this appeal.

(2.) Ext.P1 is the cheque in question for an amount of Rs.40,000/-. Ext.P2 memo issued from the bank discloses that it bounced for want of sufficient fund in the account of the respondent. Ext.P5 discloses that the statutory notice was returned unserved, even though due intimation was given from the post office to the addressee, the respondent/accused. It was in the above circumstances, the complaint was filed.

(3.) The case of the complainant was that there was some dealings between the parties and when it terminated, the accused was found indebted to the complainant to the tune of Rs.40,000/- and accordingly, Ext.P1 cheque dated 4.4.1996 was issued in discharge of that debt, which bounced, as mentioned above and the demand for payment was not met, in spite of the statutory notice. Therefore, an offence under Section 138 of the Act has been made out.