MOHAMMAD HUSSAIN Vs. CHEMAX TANNERS PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE revision is filed against the conviction made under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) THE accused is the revision petitioner. The main contention of the accused is that the complainant had a transaction in a Madagascar Company for supply of scrap material, since he was a resident of Madagascar and also that person is from very same locality where the complainant lives. He assured him in the transaction and an amount of 50,000 US Dollers were paid to the Madagascar company even though the goods does not reach India. Therefore trouble arose between the parties. He was asked to negotiate. He negotiated and thereafter, the Madagascar Company agreed to repay the 50,000 US Dollers. That 50,000 US Dollers were paid by way of two cheques in the name of the company at Madagascar. But, those two cheques were dishonoured. Therefore, initially, he took an attempt to take local action by issuing a legal notice. Thereafter, since he could not pay for the Lawyer for continuance of that case in Madagascar, further course of action was not taken for the cheque dishonoured case at Madagascar.

(3.) SECONDLY , he would also contend that when the transaction was admitted between the third party, when the amount is not due and payable, it is the duty of the complainant to prove that there is actual amount due and payable by the accused which was not been fully complied by the complainant. Therefore, the lower court had only taken presumption to convict which is not legally tenable.