KANTI LAL V. JAIN Vs. M/S KUTIAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) For the convenient sake, the parties may be referred to as the complainant and the accused.

(2.) It is the case of the complainant that A.1 is a partnership firm and A.2 to A.6 are his partners. It is the further case of the complainant that A.1 had issued 32 cheques of various amounts on various dates to one Mr. Rajkumar Chopda, Proprietor of M/s Manek Syndicate, Coimbatore-1 and that the said Mr. Rajkumar Chopda has discounted 32 cheques with the complainant and endorsed the said cheques in favour of the complainant after receiving the due consideration on 13.12.2004, 28.12.2004 and 4.1.2005. The complainant, being the " holder in due course" of 32 cheques, deposited the same in her bank account and the cheques were returned unpaid on 13.04.2005 with an endorsement " payment stopped by the drawer ". The complainant issued notice dated 23.04.2005 under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act to the accused. The accused received the statutory notice, but sent belated reply notice dated 01.06.2005 denying the allegation. Hence the complainant initiated a prosecution in C.C.No. 60 of 2006 before the Judicial Magistrate No. V, Coimbatore-2 for the offence punishable under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the accused.

(3.) On receipt of summons, the accused appeared and he was furnished with the copy of the complaint. When the accused was questioned about the substance of the accusation, the accused denied the same.