LAWS(MAD)-2007-7-394

G C RAVINDRAN Vs. S SRIDHAR

Decided On July 18, 2007
G.C. RAVINDRAN Appellant
V/S
S. SRIDHAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Appeal is directed against the Judgment passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Sivakasi made in C.C.No.515 of 2002 dated 15.10.2004.

(2.) THE Complainant's case is briefly as follows:- P.W.1 Ravindran is the complainant. He was the power of Attorney of M/s. Lajapathy Packers (Complainant company). THE deed of power of attorney is Ex.P.1. First accused was a private limited Company. A2 was the Managing Director of the Company and A3 and A4 were the Director of the Company. THE above said company produced and sold variety of wooden box materials. THEre were business dealings between the complainant and the accused company. In that above business dealings, the accused were liable to pay Rs.2,01,778/-. To substantiate the same complainant produced the account ledger which is marked as Ex.P.2. On request for payment, the accused issued four cheques to settle the sum of Rs.2,01,778/- in favour of M/s. Lajapathy Packers drawn on State Bank of India, Sivakasi. (ii) One cheque is for Rs.56,273/- bearing number 472998 dated 25.01.2002, another cheque is for Rs.50,000/- bearing No.492997 dated 25.01.2002 and third cheque is for Rs.51,145/- bearing No.472984 dated 25.01.2002 and the 4th cheque is for Rs.44,360/- bearing No.472983 dated 20.01.2002. THE above said cheques are Exs.P.3 to 6. (iii) THE cheques were presented to the Tamilnad Mercantile Bank, Sivakasi for collection on 17.07.2002. But, the cheques were dishonoured and the same were returned to the complainant with an intimation "Funds Insufficient". THE return memos is Ex.P.7 series. THE debit advice is Ex.P.8. So, the complainant sent a registered notice (Ex.P.9) on 22.07.2002 demanding the value of the above four dishonoured cheques. THE accused received the notice on 24.07.02, 25.07.02 and 27.07.02 respectively. THE postal acknowledgment cards is Ex.P.10 series. THEn, the second accused alone sent a reply (Ex.P.11) with false allegations. Rest of the accused did not sent any reply and even they did not prepare to repay the amount. Hence the complaint was instituted against the accused for the offence committed under Section 138 and 142 of Negotiable Instrument Act.

(3.) CHALLENGING the judgment of acquittal of the second accused passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Sivakasi, this Appeal has been filed by the Complainant.