2017 (9) TMI 1198

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd agreed to repay the same with interest at 18% p.a. The further case of the complainant is that the respondent has issued a cheque on 16.08.2012 for Rs. 50,000/- in partial discharge of the said debt and the cheque was honoured and he has realized the amount. The complainant alleged that for the discharge of remaining debt, on 25.08.2012, the respondent has issued the cheque in question for Rs. 3,50,000/- and when the cheque was presented for encashment, it was dishonoured for the reason " insufficient funds" in the account of the respondent. Thereafter, the petitioner has issued a notice, calling upon the respondent to pay the amount covered by the cheque and as there was no reply from him, he has filed the complaint. In support of the c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ounsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the Trial Court on the materials available on record, has reached a reasonable conclusion and the view taken by the Trial Court is a possible view on the evidence and that therefore, there is no ground for interference. 5. The definite case of the complainant is that he lent Rs. 4,00,000/- on 17.07.2012 and the respondent has agreed to repay the same with interest at 12% p.a. According to him, the respondent executed a promissory note and the copy of the same has been marked as Ex.P1. However, the original promissory note was not filed and no one signed as witness in the said document. The complainant has stated that the respondent has issued a cheque on 16.08.2012 for Rs. 50,000/- in....