Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Bangalore District Court

Tvs Credit Services Limited vs Kishore B on 21 January, 2026

SCCH-26                                     C.C.No.21519/2024


KABC020659812024




 IN THE COURT OF XXIV ADDITIONAL SMALL CAUSES
     JUDGE, & A.C.J.M. AT :BENGALURU (SCCH-26)

     DATED THIS THE 21st DAY OF JANUARY 2026.

             PRESENT :      SRI. APPASAB NAIK,
                                   B.A.L.L.B.(Spl)
                            XXIV ADDL. SCJ & ACJM
                                 BENGALURU.
   1. Sl. No. of the Case   C.C.No.21519 of 2024

   2. Name of the           TVS Credit Services Limited,
      Complainant           Having its registered office at
                            Chaitnya No.12,
                            Khader Nawaz Khan Road,
                            Nungambakkam,
                            Chennai-600006,
                            and Regional office at
                            No.1613/31,
                            Vishnupriya Tower,
                            KBG Extension, MKK Road,
                            Nagappa Block,
                            Devaiah Park,
                            Bangalore-560 021.
                            Represented by its
                            Authorized Signatory,
                            Mrs. Kusuma Pavan Chokira,
                            Area Legal Manager and PA Holder
                            of the complainant,
                            Aged 33 years,
                            R/o Bangalore.
                            (By Sri. Rajkumar R Naik -
                                     Advocate)
 SCCH-26                        2              C.C.No.21519/2024


   3. Name of the            Kishore B.,
      Accused                S/o Thippeswamy,
                             Age-major,
                             No.131, 1st Floor,
                             Dasanakappalu,
                             Bogadi Post,
                             Mysore,
                             Near Marigudi Temple,
                             Mysore-570026.
                             (By Sri. Manjunath K.V.,-
                                      Advocate)
   4. The offence            U/s.138 of the Negotiable
      complained of          Instruments Act
   5. Opinion of the         Accused found guilty
      judge
                         -: JUDGMENT :-

  The complainant has filed this complaint Under Section

223 of B.N.S. against the accused alleging that the accused

has committed an offence punishable U/Section 25 of the

Payment and Settlement System Act, 2007 R/w section .138

of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. (In short N.I.Act).

  2.     The brief facts of the complainant's case are as

under:

  The complainant is a non-banking financial company

registered under the provisions of Companies Act, 1956,

having its registered office at Chennai and regional office at

Bengaluru.    On the request and representation of accused
 SCCH-26                           3                  C.C.No.21519/2024


and upon agreeing to various written terms, conditions,

covenants      and    execution   of   agreement/loan        account

No.KA3025UV0000487, dated: 23.05.2022, complainant had

granted the loan of Rs.7,00,000/- to the accused under the

product UV.     As per the terms and conditions of the said

facility, the accused has agreed to pay the loan amount with

interest by way of monthly installments as per the

repayment      schedule    besides     other    charges      to    the

complainant.     The accused has opted for ACH/NACH/ECS

facility of the complainant to repay the loan amount and he

has   issued    the    mandate    in   favour   of     complainant.

Accordingly the accused has also issued ACH/NACH/ECS

standing instructions to his bank to debit EMI/outstanding

dues/loss on sale/part payment of Rs.62,790/- towards

repayment of partial loan as per the terms and conditions of

the agreement to his bank IndusInd Bank Ltd., IFSC

Code/MICR-INDB0000060, from his bank account bearing

No.169901676416 corresponding to credit the said amount

to the account of the complainant bank HDFC Bank situated

at Hennur Road Branch, Bangalore.
 SCCH-26                           4                 C.C.No.21519/2024


  3.      The complainant after obtaining ACH/NACH/ECS

mandate which is authenticated by the accused and

complainant bank, sent the said mandate to NPCL (National

Payment     Corporation   Ltd.)       for   registration     to   avail

ACH/NACH/ECS facility. After receiving the said mandate

from NPCL, it has sent the mandate scanned image and

relevant data to the accused bank and same is accepted by

the accused bank to debit the said amount directly into the

account of complainant's bank i.e., HDFC Bank, situated at

Hennur Road Branch on the due date, the UMRN-

INDB0000000002094075. The accused has failed to make

the payment inspite of several requests and reminders and

as per the terms and conditions of the agreement to

maintain adequate balance in his account.                  Hence, the

ACH/NACH/ECS auto debit mandate represented by the

complainant to the accused bank account in respect of

EMI/outstanding    dues/part          payment    dated:15.05.2024

amounting to Rs.62,790/- was returned with the memo as

"Balance Insufficient" on 15.05.2024 from the bank account

of the accused. The intimation of dishonour electronic funds
 SCCH-26                        5             C.C.No.21519/2024


transfer has been received by the complainant's bank user

No.HDFC00081000006252.

    4.     The complainant has issued legal notice to the

accused on 31.05.2024 through RPAD by demanding the

accused to pay the amount against the said electronic funds

transfer within 15 days from the receipt of notice.       The

postal status shows that, notice delivered on 19.06.2024. In

spite it, the accused failed to comply the demands made in

the notice. Hence, this complaint.

     5.     After perusing the contents of the complaint and

documents, this court has taken cognizance of offence

punishable u/s 138 of NI act and registered PCR. Thereafter,

this court has recorded the sworn statement of Legal

Managing and Power of Attorney Holder of complainant

company namely Mrs. Kusuma Pavan Chokira as PW.1 and

got marked 7 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7.       Since, the

complainant has made-out prima-facie case to proceed

against the accused, the case has been registered in

Criminal Register No.III and issued summons to the

accused.    In response to the summons, the accused        has
 SCCH-26                          6               C.C.No.21519/2024


appeared before the court through his counsel and he was

enlarged on bail. Subsequently, plea was recorded and the

substance of the accused was read over and explained to

him and he has pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried

and further, the Statement of the accused U/Sec.351 of

BNSS      was   recorded   and   incriminating   circumstances

appeared in the evidence against the accused was read over

to the accused and he has denied all incriminating

circumstance appeared in the evidence and chosen to lead

defence evidence.

     6.    In view of the principle lead down by the Hon'ble

Apex court in the case of Indian Bank Association & others

V/s Union of India and others, after appearance of accused

the sworn statement of the Power of Attorney Holder of the

complainant is treated as evidence of complainant as PW-1

and the documents produced by the complainant at the time

of sworn statement are considered as a document of the

complainant as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.7. As per the principle laid

down by the Hon'ble Apex court in the case of Indian Bank

Association & others V/s Union of India and others, the
 SCCH-26                          7              C.C.No.21519/2024


accused has filed application u/s 145 (2) of N.I.Act seeking

permission to cross examination of PW-1.        When the case

was posted for cross-examination of P.W.1, at this stage, the

complainant and accused have filed joint memo and prayed

to pass Judgment on the basis of terms and conditions

enumerated in the joint memo.

     7. Heard arguments of both side and perused the

materials.

     8. From the above facts of the case, the points that

arise for my consideration are: -

            1. Whether the accused is liable to be
               convicted in terms of joint memo
               dated: 21.01.2026?
            2. What Order?
     9. My findings to the above points are as under :

                 Point No.1 : - In the Affirmative
                Point No.2 :- As per final order, for the
                              Following: -

                       :: R E A S O N S ::
      10.     Point No.1: - This court has already issued a

process to the accused and in response to it, accused ap-

peared and proceed with the trial, as such there is no need
 SCCH-26                         8              C.C.No.21519/2024


to go back again to reconsider the compliance of provisions

of Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.


     11. To attract the offence U/sec 25 (1) of the payment

and Settlement Systems Act,2007, makes it an offense for a

person to initiate an electronic funds transfer that is dishon-

oured due to insufficient funds or exceeding the pre- ar-

ranged credit limit in their account. The Provision applies

only when the transfer is for the payment of a debt or liabil-

ity and was initiated according to the system provider's

guidelines, as outlined in the provisos to the section. Section

25(5) of Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007, clears

that the provisions of Chapter XVII of the Negotiable Instru-

ments Act 1881 shall apply to the dishonour of electronic

funds transfer to the extent the circumstances admit. Chap-

ter XVII of N.I.Act, deals with Of Penalties in case of Dishon-

our of certain cheques for insufficiency of funds in the Ac-

counts, which was having section 138 to 148. Accordingly

the complainant is required to prove the existence of legally

enforceable debt for which electronic transfer in question

was agreed. As per to the section 139 of Negotiable Instru-
 SCCH-26                          9              C.C.No.21519/2024


ment Act, there is presumption in favour of complainant, as

to the existence of the legally enforceable debt or other liabil-

ity. But the said presumption is rebuttable.

    12. The complainant in support of his case examined its

Power of Attorney holder Smt. Kusuma Pawan Chokira as

PW.1. In her evidence affidavit she has reiterated the

complaint averments and got marked          the documents as

Ex.P.1 to 7. When the matter was posted for cross of P.W.1,

the complainant and the accused have filed joint memo and

prayed to pass the judgment on the basis of terms and

conditions enumerated in the joint memo. The accused has

agreed to pay the amount of Rs.62,790/- as full and final

settlement. Further the accused has agreed to pay amount

of Rs.62,790/- in     Eight installments to the complainant

company i.e., Rs.6,000/- on 21-01-2026, Rs.8,000/- on 21-

02-2026, Rs.8,000/- on 21-03-2026, Rs.8,000/- on 21-04-

2026, Rs.8,000/- on 21-05-2026, Rs.8,000/- on 21-06-

2026, Rs.8,000/- on 21-07-2026 and Rs.8,790/- on 21-08-

2026. Further the accused has undertaken to honour the

eight installments without fail and in case of default to clear
 SCCH-26                         10              C.C.No.21519/2024


the installments, he shall take the appropriate legal action

against the accused.

     13. The complainant has agreed to receive the above

mentioned amount from the accused as full and final

settlement of the amount. The above payment shall be paid

on their respective date/time, failing which the complainant

will reserve all his rights to further proceed with the case

and take suitable action against the accused, in accordance

with law. Both the parties to the above case have agreed to

the terms and conditions and have on their own free will and

voilition signed this joint memo.

     14. Therefore, when the accused has admitted liability

to the extent of Rs.62,790/-, the complainant acknowledged

through this joint memo and         today, the complainant has

received the amount of Rs.6,000/- from the accused, hence

the court opinion that to the extent of Rs.56,790/-, accused

is liable to be convicted. As such, I answer point No.1 in the

Affirmative.

     15. Point No.2: In the light of the above discussed facts

and circumstances of the case, I proceed to pass the
 SCCH-26                               11                  C.C.No.21519/2024


following:

                                ORDER

Acting under Section 278[2] of BNSS, the accused is hereby convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act R/w. Sec.25 of Payment and Settlement Systems Act 2007 and sentenced to pay fine amount of Rs.56,790/-(Rupees Fifty Six Thousand Seven Hundred and Ninety) as stated in the joint memo. If the said amount is deposited, same shall be paid to the complainant as compensation.

The joint memo filed by both parties dated:21.01.2026 shall part and parcel of the record/judgment.

In default, accused shall undergo SI for a period of six months.

It is further made it clear that if the accused opt to undergo imprisonment, it does not absolve him from liability of paying compensation to the complainant.

Office is hereby directed to supply free certified copy of this judgment to the accused forthwith.

SCCH-26 12 C.C.No.21519/2024

The bail bond of the accused and surety stands cancelled.

(Typed to my dictation by the stenographer, directly on computer, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 21st January 2026) (APPASAB NAIK) XXIV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & A.C.J.M. BENGALURU.

::A N N E X U R E::

LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:
P.W.1 : Smt. Kusuma Pavan Chokira. LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:
Ex.P.1 : Notarized copy of Power of Attorney.
Ex.P.2 : NACH report. Ex.P.3 & : Office copy of legal notice with 4 translated copy.

Ex.P.5 : Postal receipt.

Ex.P.6 : Postal track report. Ex.P.7 : Certificate U/Sec.63(4)(b) of BSA. LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED:

- NONE -
LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED:
Digitally signed
APPASAB by APPASAB
- NIL - RAMAPPA RAMAPPA NAIK Date: 2026.01.29 NAIK 10:49:58 +0530 (APPASAB NAIK) XXIV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & A.C.J.M. BENGALURU.