HARESH KUMAR N SHAH Vs. A Y PRABHAKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal against the acquittal against the dismissal of the private complaint filed under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) Learned counsel appearing for the complainant submitted that only point for consideration is that whether the complaint has been filed in time or not.

(3.) The case of the complainant is that he paid a sum of Rs.5,00,000/-on various dates as an advance in pursuance of an agreement entered into between them for the purchase of a property, on condition that failing to execute the sale deed, the accused should return the amount. On account of various circumstances, the said property could not be handed over to the complainant by the accused. Hence, the complainant called upon the accused to repay the advance. The accused returned a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- to the complainant and for the balance of Rs.1,00,000/-, he gave a cheque dated 10.04.1991 drawn on Indian Bank, Egmore Branch. When the said cheque was presented for payment, the same was dishonoured with an endorsement "insufficient funds". Hence, the complainant issued a notice dated 09.05.1991, calling upon the accused to pay the said sum. In spite of the notice the accused kept quiet. The accused has committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, the complainant filed a private complaint before the learned trial Magistrate who in turn took up the matter on his file in C.C.No. 6392 of 1991 and the trial Magistrate convicted the accused. Against the said conviction, the accused filed an appeal before the IV Additional Sessions Judge, Chennai in C.A.No. 84 of 1994 who in turn set aside the order of the trial Magistrate. Aggrieved by the judgment of the lower appellate Judge, the complainant has come forward with the above appeal.