High Court Karnataka High Court

Sri M A Krishnan S/O Armugam vs The Repatiates Co Op Finance & … on 30 September, 2008

Karnataka High Court
Sri M A Krishnan S/O Armugam vs The Repatiates Co Op Finance & … on 30 September, 2008
Author: Jawad Rahim
Issi ms arm com? 0? :<AmA'z'A:<A AT     _

myefi 11% THE 33?" {wt at-'~ 5EFT§fiifi,ER';A'2QOéjj:  O A     

BEFQRE _  ,  _ _
we f-fC3N'Bi.E Mmvsjrgata   1 K 
Crt. M. hia.      O 
BEWEEN:      

smrmmxsarm -A  

s19.a.mLaGA--M   ,   %

§s1AaI£}RIN.v§n:'§f   

% ~ 1' %lat'i'flQ?mQ.T 1?"? in' 

2* 3 H_fi7fi§§{;'vEfl3?SlRA'?-5i$.{3.i'u9,,--  

2"" sgrgsta. i'*I%€§!§€:iaéiLQ'i%£. A  
   -   mmuuea

(8? $r§ %;!§';--AFi$a#'Ea£1r¥:£::,'V:§:£3f;¢; jfwf H/s. : cs JAIRAJ AND
AS5ߣZAT%,'_ADV%l5;,_ } M 

', uuflaivgn

...';J_'l' IKAKNAIAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA H16]-I COURT OF KARNATAKA HIGH COUR1

L ~ _ as Its cnzer-' MANAGER.

 _ "-'.1?-.£E'vR;E;§A?i.5;T% co. 0?
O ;';"E£'iA»§'al;;(1'Ei.&' txevemmeur sxusuc
L isgcxa, hee;'48% aAsAvEswAaANAGA.R
 at" sign, 3 519.35, 3*" BLOCK
O . xaésmvssxvammean, BANGALORE.

.. RESPOHDENT
£RLRP FILED 3.15.39? EL 401 CR.P.C BY THE

  '4"Afi?0CA?E ma ms rssrmouen Pmmnc THAT ms
 '"§'ION'8»LE CDUR3" MSW 35 PLEASE!) T9 551' ASIDE THE
V .}£§%!'~§EHT &. ORSER PASSED 8"!' XXII AEJDL, CMM., &.

. --.-m-'vars &II\7lI 'N-IJSJIKJ

XXIV ABEL, SMALL CAUSE JU%, B'LORE IN
C,.C.!'i$.362'95iG2 ON 13.9.64, ANS JUDGMENT PASSED 8''!'

M,

LIEIIII I.l|nLnm.........._-« -



-vv--- HIGH COURT OFKARNATAKA I-HG!-I COURT OF KARNATAKA HGH COURT OF KARNWKA I-HGH COURT

'Ell ...-..mnmm-a. s-nun Luulu O.0.;= KARNATAKA

A cosrzplaint was prmntad under 
<:r.§.£., by the resaandant inflating pr-tasecutiséisfrifx  
Em peaéticsner far the offence pun$h3§I§.,u.n_d;é,r   V
cf thus I'M. Act, an the plan that  

a:s,2e,cmm,«'- from the r«aVfi.:»:§:;'r:r:£e::iA:'¥Ba;3i»:..AVtV:fze
rwnfi: of Ocbcabar 2390_and'V.O-h§:V£i'L_:*«sifi-mg tfiénv--AAdai'auibed
cantimzawigr in  and
awe interest {mg  arrears of
Rs,24;E€4,35§,¥»!"»v Oaemnas fffide by the Bank,
ha  issued a cheque
drawrz  .C¥'rc!e branch, in 3 sum of
Rs.4,9f3,5?§?=!¢;'+:_'car§O  The cheque was towards

jzagt gaaiymant  due by him and the cheque

 far encashment. it was rammed by

  §cafiz:1.1**§?ys*g§$a:'.v'vé;_a:.{k Lt:l., for insufficierxcy of funds with an

v'~--«.'_.44_'e.:jdors:'a:"::yf$§'€:E' fitted E38.05.20G2.. Cansequant to return of

O   £:§éi;A.:}§§;3ua, stamtorry natice was ksued to him, which was

  O%amgs.m: on 11.35.2002. The accum ram Bo compiv

 with the demand made in ma notice. Laarrmd Magistraba

{sock cagnizanae.

W



.._ .  ---.', V_..,._r nnruw-uHl\l-\ r-ubu «mum or KARNATAKA HIGH coum or KARNATAKA HIGH courrror KARNATAKA H16:-I COURI

1 Keeping in mind the grnunds   
éeamad mange? for ma p=eti§oner,v.:IA*»wh.af¢e  Elie  

faatuafi matrizat of fiwis case. I  £§§:fihfiéfl--  

hfarxsacthre batwean the resp¢f§:$_@::t~Bhfik__anq
as met an élspuhe. Thy; farm:i..:§f"vaval!m¥ht'nf  of
Rs.,2€3,..W,0O9l- is alas r;v:$'i: :§n--.d'isQ§§i§a:"*VT%;§ fact that mars:
5 5t¥§§ as nabflity t::1vg_nrdsg"t1':»a.a!%'¥!§aa':'}.t;%é§.fi§§§{t'i§n as an the
éata 23%" prazs:a ;1ta;.t§e$ §,§7f  i:e__«-- .'aiiss'r'$ tV"§'t$E'it*: dispute. The
gufitien   'at 3!! obtained as

cnéiateraivvs:a:;:§:Af*ii3,*'.Vr:g§§;sV!c.;'fig-..__gaad fizrr prwutricrn of the

accus-5%, 3'tV+V§i£..r:V':&t£§V¢:  wtflad by that! verdict caf the

 33;: thfi$"u:--£--s--s'q£:as imusd as security in rnwpact
 Vfiaa:§ tEa§§1:sa;tien 33:: comes within the ambit and
  2':-ai.s.i*;A%A-he???  3.33 of the rilagatiabie Insuwxrrsents Act,
iflthe fifiequm are haamcad and dishonoumd for

_ V_  §§sé§ffifi'*§sa»éy af funds. Tharefara, in View of all these
 facts, I find that the chqus has bounced and

_'4"'.cf;spit-3 issmsnca of tha notice as requinad under this

pmvlsimerss of chase {in} of Section 138 01' the NJ. Act, the
accused had mt discharged tha amuunt covered urzdar the

8&4



uuqrurnnu

V. ;u-mun-u:-mu ruul-1 L..UUX E..--£J_F KARNATAKA HIGH COURTOF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT OF KARNNAKA HGH COURT OF KARNAIAKA KIGH (SOUR!

chfitéga The prossaution was iegally  
$1.3: the ameunt canremd under the cheque wag'  
despite ksvance of nciim and it egzpbs-efifi 'V
pa:-iai liability. Evidence being c!inci;i'ing:'§?:i§ !.'.'féi.'!'I. li','~'.9:l"I§ 

Gear: Quad rm omen, but,  Afiis' .&s§:Vtia_§;vait!;_f'\'vi'h'i:t:h
has laser: sightisr cvonfirmefi by 'théVV:.fi.mt*»-apphéiiata. I
do not find any infinnityvifi   by me trial
Cwrt Emd the ivifiiiargna against
five aszmsw iifiider Section 138
an! 51a :4.   . S

$. 'i4-§wajiér,_ ""ti*:e'::""v;:i:4:)ril;entIoar: that this accused

_vVcannQ£_;fAA§sA. sajdd'iai:iV:vv'witEi': daubta iiabiiity needs to ho

  Ever: an the statement of Facts

,

Eacmards discharge in part payrnent
amemnmmw in: him. Therefore, if the amount

_ uzider H18 cheque ia realized by the respondent—

Lv V'”V-4’*~..__*fiaiii;i’e}i’*thur in the pretending under Section 138 cf the
‘ “;i;§;g§’9tiahie I§¥$tr’¥;1l’¥38!’¥t$ Act, or any othar proceedings, the

gafitieifiereccusad is antitied for the daducticm of the

amaugat an rveaiized and he ‘a fiaiaie to pay oniy the

W2,

……..\. I-ll’ nMfi1VHIHI\H mm Luulu V..u;- mmmnam mzsu COURT OF KARNATAKA HEGH COURT or KARNATAKA I-!£GH count or KARNAYAKA HIGH COURT

baéarscs amarunt. Therefara, if any paymant is 2
me pnetitianer-accusa in pursuance of the
awdersé the sarnue shall be given dsadiictimj. igizid

nut -mf §E~se arnaamwt payabie byhim. Hdfi§§er, ‘t+king.

canséderatéun 233$ fact: that tliak-L§u:§z’arfi ‘has
mm by than Arbmmr, .__fine.er ‘résfs;A25,oob;-%:av[iud by
fixer t!’§~Ed Caurt and :*§i:.r:§!i_’.::iav”$:»;_j;elia€e Court:
neads; §e be t-ee¢:!..;.:§éid ~.l:z:: f:§§§6,2o,ma;- is
512 ameurats’ shall adjust
tawards E.i*:ae* ii’ ‘r’:eccvered as per the

aa”bit{ati§fi_ ‘ariwéaraii fizrbitrafior.

._;abu?iré~s=.E observations, 31% petition Es

dfipfiééé = ‘_’ ‘ –.

Sd/-5
‘Judge

£3!!!