JOTHI SAREES Vs. PON MURUGANATHAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is filed by the complainant challenging the acquittal of the accused for the offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act passed by the learned Judicial magistrate, No. 3, Erode, in c. C. No. 483 of 1994 dated 29. 03. 1995.

(2.) THE allegation, as per the complaint, is that the complainant is a registered partnership firm doing business in textiles under the name and style of "jothi Sarees". THE accused is the proprietor of "dhanaraj Textiles" who is also doing business in textiles. It is stated in the complaint that the accused is a regular customer of the complainant and he purchased textile goods often on credit basis. It is further stated in the complaint that on 04. 01. 1994 under bill Nos. 3 to 7, the accused purchased goods worth Rs. 2,12,446/- on credit. It is further alleged after deducting several payments made by the accused, the outstanding amount as on date was Rs. 2,05,079/ -. In order to discharge the said liability, the accused is said to have issued four cheques in favour of the complainant totalling to rs. 2,05,329/- and the particulars of the cheques are as follows: While all the above cheques are drawn on the State Bank of Travancore, Tuticorin Branch, and all are post dated, for the convenient payment by the accused. THEreafter, the complainant presented the cheque bearing No. 618452 on 15. 04. 1994 and the same was returned on the ground of "insufficient funds". THErefore, the complainant issued a lawyer's notice through registered post dated 25. 05. 1994 to the accused demanding payment within 15 days. It is further alleged in the complaint that after the receipt of the said notice the accused personally met the complainant and requested him to present all the above said cheques on 06. 08. 1994 and promised to make arrangements for clearing the cheques. Accordingly, on 06. 08. 1994, the complainant presented all the above said four cheques for collection with corporation Bank, Erode. But to his shock and surprise all the said cheques were returned as dishonoured by the bankers of the accused on the ground of "insufficient funds". THE bank Intimation is Exs. P. 12 to 14, dated 11. 08. 1994, and the same were received by the complainant on 18. 08. 1994. THEreafter, the complainant issued a lawyer's notice through registered post dated 26. 08. 1994 which is marked as Ex. P. 15. THE accused received the said notice on 30. 08. 1994 and the postal acknowledgement is Ex. P. 16. It is further given in the complaint that subsequent to the issue of notice, the accused returned the goods worth about Rs. 1,74,908. 85. THE complainant has deducted the amount in respect of the goods returned and accordingly, the balance amount to be paid by the accused is Rs. 1,85,079/- THE complainant further stated in the complaint that in respect of the registered notice the accused failed to settle the amount due even after expiry of 15 days as contemplated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and thereby committed an offence under that section.

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the complainant has proved his case by adducing sufficient materials and evidence before the Trial Court. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the reasons pointed out by the learned magistrate for acquitting the accused are not based on the materials available on record.