2001 (10) TMI 1060

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Prabhakar and M.K.D. Namboodiri for the Appellant. V.J. Francis, P.T. Jose, A. Radhakrishnan, Jenis Francis, Ms. Shweta Garg and Mrs. Revathy Raghavan for the Respondent. JUDGMENT Variava, J.-Leave granted. Heard parties. 2. Briefly stated that facts are as follows : 2.1 The appellant filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as the cheque dated 6-4-1993, in a sum ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....3 of 1995 before the High Court of Madras. A learned Single Judge, by the impugned Order dated 20-7-2000, set aside the conviction and acquitted the first respondent. The learned Judge acquitted the first respondent on the ground that the appellant had not proved that the cheque dated 6-4-1993, had been issued for any debt or liability. 5. In our view, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained at....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bt or liability is on the accused. This court in the case of Hiten P. Dalal v. Bratindranath Banerjee [2001] 3 Comp. LJ 313 has also taken an identical view. 6. In this case, admittedly, the first respondent has led no evidence except some formal evidence. The High Court appears to have proceeded on the basis that the denials/averments in his reply dated 21-5-1993, were sufficient to shift the bu....