N BALRAJ Vs. M PONNUSAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision petitioner / appellant / accused has preferred the present revision in Crl.R.C.No.1041 of 2007, against the judgment made in C.A.No.155 of 2005, on the file of Additional District Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-I, Coimbatore, confirming the judgment passed in C.C.No.459 of 2000, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Mettupalayam.

(2.) THE respondent / complainant's case is as follows:-

(3.) P .W.1, the complainant had adduced evidence that on 05.08.1998, the accused had borrowed a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- from him as loan and executed a promissory note to this effect (Ex.P1). Subsequently, the accused had neither paid any amount towards principal or interest. On 17.09.2000, the accused had issued a cheque dated 18.09.2000 for Rs.5,00,000/-, agreeing to pay the interest later. P.W.1 deposed that he deposited the said cheque (Ex.P2) for encashment with his bankers, viz, Corporation Bank, Mettupalayam Branch on 19.09.2000. The deposit challan issued by bank was marked as Ex.P3. The said cheque was returned unpaid with an endorsement of "account closed" on 29.09.2000 through return memo marked as Ex.P4. The debit advice issued by his bankers was marked as Ex.P5. P.W.1 deposed that he sent a lawyer's notice to the accused on 12.10.2000 (Ex.P6). As there was a typing error in the said notice and as the date of return of cheque was mentioned incorrectly as 21.09.2000 instead of 29.09.2000, he had sent another rectified lawyer's notice on 13.10.2007 (Ex.P7). The accused received both the notices on 16.10.2000 as per acknowledgment cards marked as Exs.P8 and P9. P.W.1 deposed that the accused sent a reply notice on 21.10.2000 (Ex.P10), for which, the complainant had sent a rejoinder on 08.11.2001to the counsel of accused and accused (Ex.P11). The accused received the rejoinder as per acknowledgment cards marked as Exs.P12 and P13. In spite of notice, the accused did not pay the cheque amount.