SURENDRA JAINARAYAN KAPUR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the Advocate for the Applicant. In a complaint filed by the Applicant under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the learned Trial Judge has acquitted the second Respondent. The acquittal is on two grounds. The first ground is that the alleged money claim of the Applicant against the second Respondent was barred by limitation on the date on which the cheque was allegedly issued by the second Respondent. The second ground is that there was no legally enforceable liability.

(2.) THE learned Advocate for the Applicant submitted that in view of a decision of the Kerala High Court in case of Dr. K.K. Ramakrishnan Vs. Dr. K.K. Parthsaradhy and Another (2004 Company Cases Page 457), the complaint could not have been dismissed on the ground that the amount claimed by the applicant was barred by law of limitation. She submitted that a clear case was made out by the Applicant in his deposition that the cheque was issued for discharge of a legally enforceable liability and therefore, presumption under section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 will apply.

(3.) IN his affidavit of examination-in-chief, the Applicant stated thus: