S P SHANMUGAM Vs. A PADMANABHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal has been preferred against the judgment in c. C. No. 685/1999 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Salem.

(2.) THE complainant has preferred a complaint against the accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") on the ground that the impugned cheque for Rs. 7,66,820/- drawn by the accused in favour of the complainant under Ex P4 was dishonoured on presentation in the bank. A statutory notice was issued by the complainant under the original of Ex P8, which was received by the accused under Ex P9 and the reply notice was sent by the accused is Ex p10.

(3.) WHEN the incriminating circumstances were put to the accused, he would deny his complicity with the crime. He has examined Thiru Saravanan as D. W. 1 and marked Exs D1 to D21. Saravanan as D. W. 1, would depose that the accused Padmanabhan is his father and the complainant had executed a power of attorney in his favour under Ex P3 and as per the terms of the power of attorney, he has to sell the lands and hand over the sale proceeds to the complainant. He would admit that Ex P4 is the cheque drawn by his father/the accused in favour of the complainant. He also speaks about Exs D19 and D20 receipts. On the basis of the above said documentary and oral evidence, the learned trial Judge has come to a conclusion that the complainant has miserably failed to prove that the impugned cheque Ex P4 was drawn by the accused in favour of the complainant only in order to discharge a subsisting liability and accordingly dismissed the complaint thereby acquitting the accused against which the complainant has preferred this appeal.