V. POORNIMA Vs. DEVINARAYAN HOUSING & PROPERTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.4455 of 2019 on the file of the learned FTC-II, Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, thereby taken cognizance for the offences under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (herein after referred to as NI Act).

(2.) The learned counsel would submit that the petitioner is a sole accused on the complaint lodged by the respondent herein for the offences punishable under Sec. 138 of NI Act. He further submitted that the petitioner purchased a flat from the respondent herein after payment of entire sale consideration and on receipt of the entire consideration, the respondent executed sale deed in favour of the petitioner in respect of undivided share of flat. In respect of the flat, on the basis of the said sale deed, the respondent executed construction agreement in favour of the petitioner herein. After receipt of the entire payment, the respondent duly handed over the possession of the flat vide letter dtd. 20/8/2015. The possession certificate was also issued in favour of the petitioner by the respondent herein. The alleged cheque which issued by the petitioner as a security purpose at the time of entered into the agreement for construction. Now presented for collection by the respondent and filed the present false complaint as against the petitioner herein. The document which was annexed along with the complaint categorically shows that the possession of flat was already handed over to the petitioner and he is in possession and enjoyment of the said flat for the past three years. In fact after receipt of the cheque bearing No.220015, which was given for the purpose of security, the respondent duly acknowledged the same and issued receipt dtd. 20/8/2015. Therefore, the cheque is clearly barred by limitation and simply filled the present dated and presented for collection by the respondent herein. Therefore, the entire complaint is nothing but clear abuse of process of law and only to extract more money from the petitioner, the respondent herein lodged the complaint. Therefore, he sought for quashment of the entire proceedings.

(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent entered into an agreement for construction with the petitioner and the petitioner is in due of Rs.5,36,000.00. Towards the said payment, the petitioner issued cheque for a sum of Rs.5,36,000.00, which was presented for collection and the same was returned dishonour with an endorsement funds insufficient. Thereafter the respondent caused legal notice dtd. 25/10/2018, which was returned with an endorsement "refused". Therefore the petitioner has committed the offence punishable under Sec. 138 of NI Act and the complaint is very much maintainable as against the petitioner herein. Insofar as the cheque is concerned, which was issued only on 22/10/2018 and as such the complaint is never barred by limitation.