Bangalore District Court
Mr. Sendil Kumar. L vs M/S. Mahaveer Enterprises on 19 August, 2022
IN THE COURT OF XXXIII ADDL. CHIEF
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, MAYO HALL UNIT,
BENGALURU
: PRESENT :
M.Vijay, BA L, LLB.
XXXIII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
BENGALURU.
DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2022.
C.C.NO.52735/2019
COMPLAINANT : Mr. Sendil Kumar. L.
S/o Loganathan
Aged Major
Residing at Flat No.FI, Ist Floor,
No.10, Thimma Reddy Colony,
Jeevan Bhima Nagar, Bangalore75.
.Vs.
ACCUSED : M/s. Mahaveer Enterprises,
Represented by it's proprietor,
Mr. V. Harsha,
Son of Varadamanaiah
Nanja Reddy Colony, Next to ISRO
Compound, Murugeshpalya,
Bangalore.
Also at:
No. 82, Ist Floor, 5th cross, Nanja
Reddy Colony, Murugeshpalya,
Bangalore.
2
C.C.No.52735/2019
JUDGMENT
The complainant has filed this private complaint U/s.200 of Cr.P.C., against the accused for the offence punishable U/s 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.
2. The factual matrix of the case are as follows: The complainant claims to be a private concern engaged in business of distribution and supply of steel and its ancillary products in past several years, during course of its business the first accused the partnership firm represented by it's partners' A2 to 5 had placed purchased order bearing No.SCP/JJC/200 on 07.01.2019 for purchase of steel products for their on going project at Mico Layout Hongasandra, Bangalore, as per it, it has delivered the products to the accused and raised an invoice bearing No. PCIS/18192053 dated 09.01.2019 for sum of Rs.4,61,265/, same was acknowledged by the accused, towards discharge of liability the first accused issued cheque bearing No.000784 dated 07.02.2019 for sum of Rs. 4,61,465/ drawn on Andra Bank White field bank Bangalore, in its favour and requested to present it on 07.03.2019.
3C.C.No.52735/2019
3. As per the instruction of accused, the complainant claims to have presented the above cheque through his banker J&K bank Ltd., Indira Nagar branch, but, it came to be returned unpaid for "funds insufficient" vide memo dated 08.03.2019 same was brought to the notice of the accused, but, the accused again requested to represent it on 11.03.2019, accordingly, the cheque was represented , but, even for the second time, it came to the dishonored for funds insufficient vide memo dated 12.03.2019, therefore, without alternative the complainant was constrained to issue legal notice demanding the accused to pay the cheque amount i.e., the bill amount Rs.4,61,265/ on 15.03.2019, same was duly served upon the accused on 20.03.2019 and on 25.03.2019 respectively. Despite of it service, the accused have not paid the cheque amount nor replied to its notice, accordingly, alleged that, the accused have committed an o/p/u/s 138 of N.I Act.
4. Based on the complaint, the sworn statement affidavit, the documents etc., the court took cognizance of an offense punishable under Sec.138 of N.I. Act by following the guidelines of Apex Court issued in Indian Bank 4 C.C.No.52735/2019 Association case and ordered to registered a criminal case against the accused for the o/p/u/s. 138 of N.I. Act.
5. In pursuance of summons, the accused appeared through his counsel and he was on court bail. Plea has been recorded accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, further, the accused was examined U/s 313 of Cr.P.C, accused denying the incriminating materials on record.
6. To prove the case, the complainant got examined himself as PW.1 and relied upon Ex.P1 to P11. However, during the course of trial, both the parties filed joint memo dtd: 30.09.2021 stating that they have settled the matter for Rs.2,25,000/ amicably, as per the settlement, the accused has paid Rs.75,000/ to the complainant before the court and agreed to be paid remaining balance of settlement of amount of Rs.1,50,000/ on or before 28.02.2022, incase of failure the balance settlement amount complainant is at liberty to recover it with due process of law, and they prayed to pass the judgment in terms of joint memo, the court explained the consequences of memo, even then the parties prayed to pass judgment on joint memo, since parties have amicably settled the dispute for Rs.2,25,000/ same is lawful, as such, since, 5 C.C.No.52735/2019 these proceedings is summary in nature, and there is no legal impediment to pass judgment on the basis of joint memo of parties, hence, it is just and necessary to pass a necessary judgment as per the joint memo filed by the parties. Accordingly, I proceed to pass following;
ORDER Acting under Section 252 of Cr.P.C., r/w Section 147 of N.I. Act, the accused is hereby convicted for the offense punishable U/S.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
(M.Vijay), XXXIII ACMM, BENGALURU.
On considering the joint memo dated 30.09.2021 and on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, accused is hereby sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,50,000/ (One lakh fifty thousand only). In default he shall undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 6 months.
In view of Section 357 of Cr.P.C., entire fine amount of Rs.1,50,000/ shall be directly payable to complainant within agreed period i.e., 28.06.2022 as compensation.
6C.C.No.52735/2019 The office is hereby directed to supply the copy of this Judgment to the accused on free of cost.
(Dictated to the Stenographer directly on computer, typed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court, on this the 19th day of August, 2022) (M.Vijay), XXXIII ACMM, BENGALURU.
ANNEXURE
1. Witnesses examined on behalf of Complainant:
P.W.1 : Mr. Sendil Kumar. L.
2. Documents marked on behalf of complainant:
Ex.P.1 : Original Cheque Ex.P.1(a) : Signature of the accused Ex.P.2 : Bank return memo Ex.P.3 : Office copy of the legal notice Ex.P.4 : 2 Postal receipts Ex.P.5 & 6 : Postal acknowledgements
3. Witnesses examined on behalf of Accused:
NIL
4. Documents marked on behalf of Accused:
NIL (M.Vijay), XXXIII ACMM, BENGALURU.