K. PAVITHRAN Vs. K. GANESAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE accused before the trial court is the petitioner herein. For the sake of convenience, the parties will be referred to as complainant and accused. The complainant is M/s. The Kumaran Ginning Mills, a partnership firm run by one K. Ganesan (Managing Partner), K. Nirmaladevi and G. Pradeep. Mr. E.R. Mariappan is said to be an Accountant working in M/s. The Kumaran Ginning Mills.

(2.) IT is the case of the complainant that the accused is the proprietor of M/s. Super Good Textiles and that he had purchased cloth on credit from the complainant by Bill Nos. 103 to 120 to the tune of Rs. 2,52,48,640/ -. When the complainant started demanding payments, the accused executed a mortgage on 9.1.2013 with respect to a property belonging to him. Thereafter, the accused appears to have issued 5 Cheques for Rs. 50 Lakhs each all dated 24.11.2014, totalling Rs. 2,50,00,000/ - towards the said liabilities. The cheques when presented for payment, were dishonoured, following which the complainant issued statutory notice on 28.11.2014 to the accused and on the failure of the accused to repay the amount within the stipulated period, the complainant lodged the prosecution in C.C. No. 172 of 2014 before the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Tiruppur for an offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) TO appreciate the validity of the first ground, it may be necessary to extract verbatim the preamble portion in the complaint and it reads as follows: