EVERISTO REMEDIO SEQUEIRA Vs. SHAIK HASINA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Senior Counsel Ms. A. Agni along with Ms. Jay Sawaikar, learned Advocate for the appellant and Mr. Jatin Ramaiya, learned Advocate for the respondent.

(2.) By this appeal the appellant/ original complainant is challenging the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Magistrate at Quepem whereby the complaint filed under Sec. 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act (N.I. Act, for short) was dismissed and the respondent was acquitted.

(3.) In nutshell, it is the contention of the appellant that the respondent issued promissory notes dtd. 18/4/2012 amounting to Rs.3,00,000.00 and Rs.1,30,000.00 - each in favour of the appellant and towards repayment of such amount, issued two cheques dtd. 15/6/2012 drawn on Saraswat Bank, Curchorem, Sanvordem, Goa for a sum of Rs.3,00,000.00 and Rs.1,30,000.00 each. On presentation of such cheques, the banker returned it vide memo dtd. 2/7/2012 with remark "funds insufficient". The appellant issued legal notice demanding the amount mentioned in the cheque through his Advocate vide notice dtd. 17/7/2012 thereby calling upon the respondent to pay the amount mentioned in the cheque within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of said notice. Respondent received legal notice and replied vide her reply dtd. 27/7/2012 taking false defence. Accordingly, the appellant lodged complaint under Sec. 138 of the N.I. Act before the learned Magistrate who after taking cognizance, issued process against the respondent. After the trial concluded, the learned Magistrate dismissed the complaint and acquitted the respondent on the ground that the appellant failed to prove that cheques were issued towards legally enforceable debt.