CHET RAM Vs. TARSEM CHAND AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT -complainant, Chet Ram being aggrieved of the acquittal of all the respondents by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patiala in the complaint filed by him under Sections 467/468/471/120B IPC has preferred the present appeal.

(2.) APPELLANT -Chet Ram through his Special Power of Attorney, Manwinder Singh filed a complaint dated 01.08.2006 against the respondents under Sections 467/468/471/120B IPC averring that he purchased a truck bearing registration No.PB -11K -2322 from M/s. Sundram Finance Company, Ludhiana for a sum of Rs. 4,25,000/ - out of which an amount of Rs. 1,25,000/ - was paid to M/s. Sundram Finance Company and a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/ - was got financed from respondent No. 1 - Tarsem Chand who is sole proprietor of M/s. Mamta Finance Company. Accused Tarsem Chand while advancing loan of Rs. 3,00,000/ - had obtained Chet Ram's signatures on five or six blank stamp papers as well as blank cheques. Said blank stamp papers were purchased by Chet Ram in the months of September to November, 1998. After repayment of the entire loan amount, respondent No. 1 - Tarsem Chand was not getting the entry in the Registration Certificate (RC) being corrected. He also tried to forcibly repossess the truck from appellant - Chet Ram.

(3.) AS per the complaint once the amount of loan of Rs. 3,00,000/ - stood repaid there was no occasion for Chet Ram to raise another loan of Rs. 2,80,000/ -for a purpose mentioned 'nil'. Alleged agreement dated 20.11.2000 is stated to be a forged and fabricated one, drawn on blank papers taken from the appellant at the time of advancing the first loan. Said agreement is stated to be forged by the accused persons in conspiracy with each other.