R.M. VIJAYAKUMAR Vs. S. PRABHAKARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On 26.08.2014, the appellant R.Vijayakumar has filed a private complaint through the power of attorney N.R.D.Ramkumar in Judicial Magistrate No.I Coimbatore, against the respondent, for the offence punishable under section 138 NI Act.

(2.) Subsequent to the filing of the private complaint, during the time of trial, the power holder N.R.D.Ramkumar was examined as P.W.1 and marked six documents as Exs.1 to 6. As per the case of the appellant, on 10.06.2003, the present respondent had availed a loan of Rs. 1,00,000/- (One lakh), on promising to repay the same with 24% interest and executed a pronote, which was marked as Ex.P1. In order to repay the said loan, he issued a cheque for the same amount drawn in a Canara Bank. Subsequent to that, the cheque was returned on 10.07.2004, by mentioning the reason that "account closed". Further, the written memo and the debit advice issued by the Bank were marked as Exs.B3 and B4. Subsequent to the return of the cheque, the present appellant issued an Advocate Notice on 05.08.2004 and the same was received by the respondent on 07.08.2004, the copy of the Advocate notice and the acknowledgment signed by the respondent was marked as Exs.B5 and B6. Even after receiving the Advocate Notice , due to the nonpayment of the loan availed by the respondent, the complaint has been filed under the provisions of 138 Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) After taking cognizance, the power holder N.R.D.Ramkumar was examined as P.W.1 and after closing the petition as side evidence, on the side of the respondent , none was examined. Thereafter, the trial court came to the conclusion that the respondent is not committed any offence under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Against which the present Criminal Appeal was filed by the complainant. In order to substantiate the claim, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that in the trial court, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint on the following grounds: