Bangalore District Court
M/S.R.R.Consultancy vs M/S.Ashwa Cars Pvt.Ltd on 3 February, 2020
IN THE COURT OF XIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE, BENGALURU.
:: PRESENT ::
SRI. NAGARAJEGOWDA. D. B.Com, L.L.B.,
XIII A.C.M.M. Bengaluru.
C.C. NO.394/2018
Dated: This the 3rd day of FEBRUARY-2020
COMPLAINANT/S: M/s.R.R.Consultancy
No.30/B, SBI Colony,
Basaveshwaranagar,
Bengaluru-560079,
Represented by its Proprietor
Sri.Rangaswamy.M.S.
V/s.
ACCUSED: M/s.Ashwa Cars Pvt.Ltd.,
No.196, 5th Main, Chamarajpet,
Bengaluru-560018,
Represented by its Director,
Sri.Sacchidananda.
Offence Under Section.138 of Negotiable
Instruments Act.
Plea of the accused Pleaded not guilty
Final order Convicted
**
JUDGMENT 2 C.C.394/2018
:: JUDGEMENT ::
The complainant filed the private complaint under Section.200 of Cr.P.C alleging that the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. The brief facts of the complainant case as per Ex.P9 complaint reads as follows:
The complainant is a registered dealer in Gift items and other home appliances, under the name of R.R.Consultancy. The accused is an authorized service station for Maruti Suzuki Motors under the name and style of 'Ashwa Cars Pvt.Ltd.' The complainant regularly used to get service of his car at the accused service station, since more than ten years. In the month of March 2015, the accused approached the complainant for the purpose of supply of gift items. The complainant agreed to supply the gift items as requested by the accused after due negotiations, terms and conditions, as the payment shall be within 30 days from the date of service of items. JUDGMENT 3 C.C.394/2018 Accordingly the complainant supplied the items and raised the credit invoices for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-. As per the discussions both the parties are agreed that the accused shall make payment to the complainant within 30 days from the date of service of items, in case of failure of payment within 30 days, the invoice amount shall carry interest at the rate of 2% monthly and the accused is agreed to the said condition. After lapse of 30 days the complainant approached and requested the accused for payment. The accused continuously postponed the payment one or other pretext and finally he issued a cheque bearing No.000896 dated 20.05.2017 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-, drawn on HDFC Bank, Chamarajpet, Bengaluru. The complainant presented the said cheque for collection through is bankers Karur Vysya Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru, but the said cheque returned with endorsement due to 'Insufficient Funds' on 22.05.2017. The complainant got issued legal notice to the accused on 20.06.2017, same is sent by RPAD and also speed post, the same has been duly served to the accused on 21.06.2017, but the accused did not reply or comply JUDGMENT 4 C.C.394/2018 the terms of notice and thus the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and punish the accused in accordance with law in the interest of justice.
3. After recording sworn statement of complainant with documentary evidence, this court has registered the case against the accused for the offence punishable under Section.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Summons issued to the accused. The accused appeared through his counsel and enlarged on bail. There afterwards, plea of accusation has been read over and explained to the accused in the language known by him and he pleaded not guilty and claims to be tried.
4. In support of the case of complainant, the complainant has filed an affidavit by way of chief- examination as PW.1 and got marked Ex.P1 to P9 and after appearance of accused got marked Ex.P10 and this PW.1 has been fully cross-examined by the accused counsel and closed his side evidence.
JUDGMENT 5 C.C.394/2018
5. Thereafterwards, accused examined under Section.313 of Cr.P.C. statement. In which he totally denied the entire case of the complainant. In support of his denial the accused took time to lead his side defence evidence, in spite of sufficient opportunity has been given he did not choose to lead his defence evidence and hence his side defence evidence taken as nil.
6. I heard the arguments of complainant counsel on merit and the accused counsel remains absent before this Court and in spite of sufficient opportunity has been given he did not appeared and addressed the argument on merit, hence his side argument taken as nil.
7. On the basis of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the following points arises for my considerations:
POINTS
1. Whether the complainant proves beyond all reasonable doubts that he supplied the material and raised the credit invoice for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-, the accused agreed to pay the JUDGMENT 6 C.C.394/2018 said amount an agreed date with interest at the rate of 2% monthly and issued a cheque bearing No.000896 dated:20.05.2017 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank, Chamarajpet, Benglauru and the complainant presented the said cheque for collection through his bankers Karur Vysya Bank, Rajajinagar Branch, Bengaluru. But the said cheque is returned dishonoured due to 'Funds Insufficient' on 22.05.2017. Inspite of issuance of legal notice to the accused on 20.06.2017 through RPAD and speed post, the notice is duly served to the accused on 21.06.2017, but the accused did not reply or comply the term of notice and thus the accused has committed an offence punishable under Section.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act?
2. What order?
8. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1: In the Affirmative
Point No.2: As per the final order,
for the following.
JUDGMENT 7 C.C.394/2018
REASONS
9. POINT NO.1: In support of the case of complainant, the complainant filed an affidavit by way of chief- examination as PW.1. In which he reiterated the complaint contention and got marked Ex.P1 to P9 and subsequently got marked Ex.P10. Ex.P1 is the cheque alleged to be issued by the accused amounting to Rs.4,00,000/- and identified the signature of the accused as per Ex.P1(a). Ex.P2 is the endorsement issued by the banker stating that Ex.P1 cheque is dishonoured due to 'Funds Insufficient'. Ex.P3 is the copy of legal notice issued to the accused and the same was sent through RPAD as per Ex.P4 & P5 postal receipts and non receipt of postal acknowledgement the complainant got issued notice to the concerned post master as per Ex.P6 is letter, Ex.P7 is the Track Consignment, Department of Posts, India, same is duly served to the accused, but the accused did not replied or complied the notice. Further got marked Ex.P8 is the Tax Invoice stands in the name of Ashwa Cars Pvt. Ltd., in which, they have supplied materials to the accused JUDGMENT 8 C.C.394/2018 amounting of Rs.4,00,000/-, Ex.P9 is the complaint which is not under dispute. Ex.P10 is the certificate of Importer- Exporter Code (IEC) stands in the name of complainant R.R.Consultancy. On the basis of oral and documentary evidence of complainant prima facie, the complainant has proved the alleged guilt of the accused and the complainant has complied all the requirements u/s.138 Negotiable Instruments Act.
10. The accused appeared and contests this case by denying the entire case of the complainant, in support of his denial the accused counsel cross-examined the PW.1, in his cross-examination the accused has purchased 180 photo frames, he knows the accused for last 10 years and he registered his Maruthi Car bearing Reg.No.KA-02-MG- 112 and used to give his car for service to the accused company, but he sold the said car during October or November 2017 and accused has not stated for which reason he has purchased gift items and he purchased the gift items in the year 2015 from the local market and he also purchased the gift item from China Country and he is JUDGMENT 9 C.C.394/2018 ready to give documents of purchasing the said gift items. But the accused has not given any instructions by sending the purchase order, except through phone he want to purchase the items from the complainant and he did not know whether he has shown Ex.P8 Tax Invoice he has stated ignorance about whether shown in the monthly sales tax returns and he is ready to produce the supply of gift items to the accused as per his ledger extract. In order to show that he had import and export registration certificate as per Ex.P10. But in spite of sufficient opportunity has been given the accused did not cross- examining the PW.1 further. Though the accused appeared and contests this case by denying entire case of the complainant at the time of recording of 313 statement, but the accused took time to lead his side defence evidence, but he failed to lead his side defence evidence in spite of sufficient time given, hence defence evidence of the accused taken as nil.
11. On the basis of cross-examination of PW.1 the accused failed to given rebuttal evidence to the case of the JUDGMENT 10 C.C.394/2018 complainant, though the accused has denied the entire case of the complainant, but he failed to give any corroborative evidence in support of defence taken by the accused. Though the complainant has not produced any bank statement. But the complainant entitled only recovery of cheque amount as compensation. As such the complainant has proved the alleged guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence the argument addressed by the complainant counsel only applicable to the said facts. Accordingly, I answer Point No.1 in the Affirmative.
12. POINT NO.2: From the forgoing reasons, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Section.255(2) Cr.P.C. the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Section.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four lakhs only). JUDGMENT 11 C.C.394/2018
The same shall be paid by the accused within 30 days from the date of this order.
Out of the said fine amount, a sum of Rs.3,99,000/- (Rupees three lakhs ninety nine thousand only) has been awarded to the complainant as compensation under Section.357 of Cr.P.C.
The rest of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) is ordered to adjust towards the state as fine.
In default of payment of fine amount, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for 4 (four) months.
(Dictated to the stenographer, corrected and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 3rd day of February 2020).
(NAGARAJEGOWDA. D.) XIII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined on behalf of the complainant:
PW.1 : Sri.Rangaswamy M.S. Documents marked on behalf of the complainant:
Ex.P1 : Cheque
JUDGMENT 12 C.C.394/2018
Ex.P1(a) : Signature of the accused
Ex.P2 : Endorsement
Ex.P3 : Legal notice
Ex.P4 & 5 : Postal Receipts
Ex.P6 : Letter issued by complainant
to Post Master dated 01.08.2017
Ex.P7 : Track Consignment
Ex.P8 : Tax Invoice in the name of
Ashwa Car Pvt.Ltd.,
Ex.P9 : Complaint
Ex.P10 : Certificate of Importer and
Exporter Code (IEC).
Witnesses examined on behalf of the accused:
Nil Documents marked on behalf of the accused: Nil (NAGARAJEGOWDA. D.) XIII Addl. C.M.M., Bengaluru. * Accused copy furnished.