Bangalore District Court
Manappuram Finance Limited vs Pinjara Rajabhakshi Ramanamalisab on 4 January, 2025
KABC020064992024
Digitally signed
by
RAGHAVENDRA
RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR
SHETTIGAR
Date:
2025.01.08
10:46:58 +0530
IN THE COURT OF XIV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE AND
ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE
(SCCH-10) AT BENGALURU
Dated This The 4th day of January 2025
PRESENT:
SHRI. RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR,
B.A., LL.B.,
XIV ADDL. SMALL CAUSES JUDGE &
ADDL.CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE,
BENGALURU.
C.C No.1630/2024
COMPLAINANT : M/s. Manappuram Finance Limited,
Having its registered office at :
CINL65910KL 1992PLC006623
IV/470A (Old) W638A,
(New) Manappuram House,
Valapad, Thrissur,
Kerala - 680 567.
& Regional Office at:
Door No.11/1A, 1st Floor,
beside Lakshmi Narasimha
Swamy Temple,
Vishwaneedam(P),
2 C.C.No.1630/2024
SCCH-10
Sunkadakatte,
Magadi Main Road,
Bengaluru - 560091.
Reptd. By its Authorized Signatory,
Mr. Chidananda. S.G.
(By Sri. S.B.G., Advocate)
// Versus //
ACCUSED : Pinjara Rajabhakshi,
Ramanamalisab,
Age : Major,
Seegenahalli,
N/R. Behind Masid,
Seegenahalli,
Bannigola, Bellary,
Karnataka
(By Sri. S.G.B, Advocate)
:: J U D G M E N T ::
This complaint is instituted by the complainant against the accused under Section 200 of Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act- 1881 R/w Section 25 of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007.3 C.C.No.1630/2024
SCCH-10
2. The Case of the complainant as per complaint averments is as follows:
The complainant is a company incorporated under the companies Act, 1956 and a Banking Company. In the course of their financial services, they introduced Digital Personal Loan facility for the benefits of its valued customers. The accused had approached the complainant company to sanction loan for his urgent financial needs. Accordingly, the complainant sanctioned the loan of Rs.89,000/- under said Digital Personal Loan facility vide Loan Account No.58631 and the accused had opted for repayment mode vide Electronic Clearing Service by signing ECS / NACH declaration. Further, under the contract a sum of Rs.1,06,430/- was due and towards payment of debt accused had issued ECS/ NACH. Transaction bearing UMRN No.SDIN7020505230032458 presented for encashment to Axis Bank Ltd, Cox Town Branch, Bengaluru, same was dishonoured with the remarks "Balance insufficient" on 4 C.C.No.1630/2024 SCCH-10 12.11.2023. Then, the complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused dated 21.11.2023, calling upon him to pay the amount. Despite receipt of notice, the accused has not paid the amount. Thus, the accused has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act R/w Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007. Hence, this complaint.
3. After filing of the complaint, the cognizance of the offence was taken and registered criminal case against the accused and the summons was issued to him. The accused has appeared before the Court through his counsel and was enlarged on bail. Subsequently, plea was recorded and the substance of the accusation was read over and explained to him. He pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
4. The sworn statement on affidavit of Authorized signatory of the complainant company is treated as evidence of PW-1 and 5 C.C.No.1630/2024 SCCH-10 the documents produced by complainant were marked as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5.
5. Further, the Statement of the Accused U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C was recorded. The accused has denied the incriminating circumstances appeared against him in the evidence. The accused has not lead any evidence on his behalf.
6. Heard the arguments. Perused the materials available on record.
7. Now the points that arise for my determination are as follows:-
1) Whether the complainant proved that the accused has opted for loan repayment mode by way of ECS/NACH and a sum of Rs.1,06,430/-
was due and payable by the accused and when ECS/ NACH was presented to the bank, same was dishonoured for 'Balance Insufficient' and despite receipt of demand notice, the accused has not paid the amount and thereby he has committed an offence punishable under 6 C.C.No.1630/2024 SCCH-10 Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007?
2) What Order?
8. On the basis of the materials available on record, my finding to the above points are as follows:
POINT NO.1: In the Affirmative.
POINT NO.2: As per the final order, for the following:
REASONS
9. POINT NO.1: According to the complainant, the accused approached the complainant company for financial assistance for his urgent financial needs and the complainant company sanctioned the loan of Rs.89,000/- and the accused has opted for repayment mode vide ECS/NACH and under contract a sum of Rs.1,06,430/- was due and payable by the accused and and when the ECS/NACH was presented, same was dishonoured for the reason 'balance insufficient' and the complainant got issued a legal notice to the accused calling 7 C.C.No.1630/2024 SCCH-10 upon him to pay the said amount and despite service of notice, the accused has not paid the amount.
10. To substantiate its case, the Authorized Signatory of the complainant company was examined as PW-1 and got marked documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.5. PW-1 has reiterated the contents of the complaint in his affidavit about lending of loan to the accused under Digital personal loan facility, declaration regarding repayment of loan through ECS/NACH, presentation of the same and its dishonour and issuance of demand notice to the accused and calling upon him to pay the amount and his failure to comply the same.
11. Now, let me scrutinize the documents relied by the complainant in order to examine the compliance of statutory requirements as envisaged under Section 138 of N.I. Act R/w Section 25, 26 and 28 of Payment and Settlement Systems Act 2007. Ex.P.1 is the Board Resolution, Ex.P.2 is the NACH 8 C.C.No.1630/2024 SCCH-10 Clearance report, Ex.P.3 is the Legal notice, Ex.P.4 is the Postal receipt and Ex.P.5 is the Postal acknowledgment.
12. On careful perusal of Ex.P.2 NACH Clearance report it reveals that, NACH transaction for a sum of Rs.1,06,429.51/- was failed for the reason 'Balance insufficient' in the account of the accused. Ex.P.3 is the Demand notice wherein it discloses that, after dishonour of ECS/NACH, the complainant caused a legal notice to the accused calling upon him to pay an amount of Rs.1,06,430/-. Said notice was duly served on the accused as per Ex.P.3.
13. On perusal of Ex.P.2 and Ex.P.3, it is crystal clear that the accused has opted for loan repayment mode vide ECS /NACH and when same was presented for a sum of Rs.1,06,429.51/- same was dishonoured for 'Balance insufficient' and despite service of notice the accused has failed to make the said payment.
9 C.C.No.1630/2024
SCCH-10
14. In the instant case, the accused neither cross-examined PW-1 nor lead any evidence on his behalf. The evidence tendered on oath by PW-1 remained unchallenged and unrebutted. Hence, the case put forth by the complainant has to be accepted. Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that the accused has committed an offence punishable U/s. 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act for dishonour of NACH by not maintaining sufficient balance in his account. Hence, this Point No.1 under consideration is answered in the Affirmative.
15. POINT NO.2: In view of the reasons stated and discussed above, the complainant has proved that, the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007. By considering the circumstances of the case and the amount involved, this Court is of the opinion that, if the accused is directed to pay fine amount of Rs.1,10,000/- it will be just and proper. 10 C.C.No.1630/2024
SCCH-10 Accordingly, this Court proceeds to pass the following;
ORDER Acting under Sec. 255(2) of Cr.P.C., the accused is found guilty and he is convicted for the offence punishable under Section 25(1) of the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 and he is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,10,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Ten Thousand only). In default to pay the fine, accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
Further, entire fine amount on recovery shall be paid to the complainant as compensation.
Supply free copy of this judgment to the accused immediately.
The bail bond stands canceled.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her and corrected by me and then pronounced in the open Court on 4 th day of January 2025).
(RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR) XIV ADDL.S.C.J., ACJM & MEMBER-MACT, BENGALURU.
11 C.C.No.1630/2024
SCCH-10 ::A N N E X U R E::
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:-
P.W1 : Mr. Chidananda. S.G LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT:-
Ex.P.1 : Board Resolution Ex.P.2 : NACH clearance report Ex.P.3 : Copy of Legal notice Ex.P.4 : Postal receipt Ex.P.5 : Postal acknowledgment
LIST OF WITNESSES & DOCUMENTS ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED:-
- NIL -
(RAGHAVENDRA SHETTIGAR) XIV ADDL.SMALL CAUSES JUDGE & ACJM, BENGALURU.