V.NAGA VINAY Vs. CH.SAMBASIVA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal appeal is filed by the complainant aggrieved by the judgment dated 07.08.2006 in C.C.No.2070 of 2003 passed by the learned II Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Ranga Reddy District, dismissing the complaint filed by the complainant under Section 138 of N.I.Act.

(2.) This appeal is filed in the background of the following factual matrix:

(3.) It is argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the trial court erred in dismissing the suit on the sole ground that the complainant did not possess valid money lending license by the date of Exs.P3 and P4 promissory notes. Learned counsel would argue that the accused failed to produce any tangible evidence that the complainant is a regular money lender within the ambit of A.P.(TA) Money Lenders Act and except a stray admission of the complainant, the accused has not produced any other cogent material to hold that the complainant is a regular money lender. Therefore, the trial court ought not to have dismissed the complaint on that ground. In support of his argument, learned counsel relied upon the decision of this Court in Ratakonda Raghu Naidu v. Kolla Sivaram Prasad and another2. He thus prayed to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial court.