P.PARAMESWARAN Vs. SWATHY TEXTILES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent herein / complainant had filed a complaint in C.C.No.281 of 2003, on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Coimbatore stating that the accused / Revision Petitioner herein had issued 3 cheques for a sum of Rs.93,694/ - dated 17.08.2002, Rs.74,955/ - dated 07.09.2002 and Rs.93,694/ - dated 11.09.2002 respectively to the complainant, totalling Rs.2,62,340/ -, out of the said amount, the accused had paid a sum of Rs.93,694/ -. The balance amount of a sum of Rs.1,68,649/ - is to be paid by the accused. To settle part of the outstanding, the accused had issued a cheque on 13.09.2002 for a sum of Rs.74,995/ - drawn on Catholic Syrian Bank, Uppilipalayam to and in favour of the complainant. The complainant had deposited the said cheque with his bankers namely Indian Overseas Bank, Ganapathy Branch and the same was returned with an endorsement of "insufficiency of funds". The same was informed to the accused and the accused requested the complainant to present the cheque on 25.10.2002. On presentation, it was again returned for lack of funds. Again, the accused had requested the complainant to present the cheque on 08.01.2003 and on presentation, it was again returned dishonoured. Hence, the complainant had levelled the said case under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) The accused had denied the liability on questioning and hence the case has been proceeded with. On the side of the complainant, the complainant was examined as PW1 and 13 documents were marked namely Power of attorney, dishonoured cheque, returned memos, debit advices, legal notice, acknowledgment card and invoices and account books. On the side of the respondent's, two witnesses were examined as RW1 and RW2 and 2 invoices were marked as Exhibits.

(3.) PW1 had adduced evidence that the accused is running a thread business in the name and style of ABA Textile Industries. The complainant's firm also is manufacturing the thread. As such, business transaction had taken place amongst them. PW1 further stated that the accused is liable to pay a sum of Rs.2,62,340/ - as due. Hence, he had issued 3 cheques, one of the cheques for a sum of Rs.93,694/ - was honoured and the balance amount of a sum of Rs.1,62,694/ - is to be paid by the accused. For settling part of the above due, the accused had issued another cheque dated 13.09.2002 for a sum of Rs.74,955/ - and the same was dishonoured twice on presentation. PW1 further stated that the accused had not paid the dues yet. In support of his evidence, he had marked the above documents.