Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. The Complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 138/142 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ("NI Act") against the Accused on the averments that the Accused and his son had approached the Complainant company and Promark Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Shri Ashok Jha requested for a loan of Rs. 3,00,000/- vide his application dated 15.06.2010 from the Complainant company stating that they needed money to make payment for purchase of a house; and assured that he would repay the loan amount of Rs. 3,00,000/- to the Complainant as per agreed terms.

4. Upon presentment, the cheque in question was returned unpaid on ground of account closed, by way of return memo dt. 05.05.2014.

5. The Complainant sent the legal demand notice dated 31.05.2014 through speed post at the address of the Accused. Hence, despite the service of the legal demand notice, the Accused failed to make the payment within the stipulated period and the Promark Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Shri Ashok Jha Complainant filed the present complaint.

8. Vide order dated 01.04.2015 opportunity was granted to the Accused to cross examine the Complainant. The Complainant/CW1 adopted his pre-summoning evidence affidavit, Ex. A1 and also proved following documents:

           Ex. A:             Board Resolution dated 15.05.2014 in
                              favor of the AR of the Complainant namely
                              Sh. Pavan Tandon.
           Ex. B:             Loan agreement dated 22.06.2010


Promark Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Shri Ashok Jha


                            executed between the Complainant and the
                            Accused.
          Mark A:           Documents of property as pledged by
                            Accused with the Complainant.
          Ex. D:            Original Cheque bearing no. 947448, dated
                            21.04.2014, amounting to Rs. 3,00,000/-.
          Ex. E:            Original return memo dated 05.05.2014.
          Ex. F:            Copy of legal demand notice dated
                            31.05.2014.
          Ex. F1:           Original Postal receipt in respect of the
                            legal demand notice.
          Ex. G:            Internet generated tracking report in
                            respect of legal demand notice.
          Ex. H:            Return envelope in respect of legal demand
                            notice.
          Ex. I:            Documents of property as pledged by
                            Accused with the Complainant.

9. Complainant Evidence was closed by way of court order at the request of Ld. Counsel for the Complainant, on 15.05.2019.

10.Thereafter, Accused was examined under Section 313 of CrPC on 15.05.2019 for explaining the circumstances appearing against him in the Complainant's evidence. He denied the Complainant's case and pleaded false implication in the present case and opted to lead evidence in his defence.

11.As part of defence evidence, the Accused examined one Sh. Deepak Kumar, Manager Regent Garage Pvt. Ltd as DW-1, who deposed in favor of the Accused and brought on record repair order dt. 13.04.2013, Ex. DW1/1 (OSR); and himself Promark Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Shri Ashok Jha as DW-2 and produced copy of complaint made to police, Ex. DW2/A and copy of case filed before Labour Court, Mark D1.