Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2006 (10) TMI 504

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....39;, respectively. 4. The complainant and the accused were friends and colleagues in the then Karnataka Electricity Board. When the accused was about to retire, he approached the complainant for a loan of ₹ 60,0007 and agreed to repay the same within a short period. The complainant advanced a sum of ₹ 60,0007 to the accused in this way that a sum of ₹ 2007 was paid in cash and the balance amount of ₹ 59,8007- was paid by three cheques. The accused has encashed the cheques. Though the loan amount was repayable within a short period, the accused took undue advantage of friendship with the complainant and agreed to repay the loan within six months with interest at the rate of 8% p.a., but the accused failed to keep up ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bt, and there was no evidence to show that the accused had acknowledged the debt within 3 years of loan. Therefore, the Trial Court recorded an order of acquittal in favour of the accused. This is impugned in this appeal. 6. The learned Counsel for the complainant submitted that the Learned Magistrate committed an error in dismissing the complaint. He cited the following decisions reported in: (i) A.V. MURTHY v. B.S. NAGABASAVANNA 2002 AIR SCW 694 (ii) RAMAKRISHNAN v. PARTHASARADHT 2003 (3) Indian Civil Cases 662 7. The learned Counsel for the respondent/accused submitted that there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgment. 8. The complainant has produced pass books at Exs. P-8 and P-9. As per Exs. P-8 and P-9, the pass....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....less- (a) The cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier; (b) The payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice, in writing, to the drawer of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) The drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or, as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. Explanation: For the purpose....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to pay a meritorious debt contracted during his minority, but not for necessaries; or if a bankrupt, in affluent circumstances after his certificate, promises to pay the whole of his debts; or if a man promises to perform a secret trust, or a trust void for want of writing, by the Statute of Frauds. In such and many other instances, though the promise gives a compulsory remedy, where there was none before either in law or equity; yet as the promise is only to do what an honest man ought to do, the ties of conscience upon an upright mind are a sufficient consideration. 11. The Hon'ble Apex Court in A.V. Murthy v. B.S. Nagabasavanna, supra, has made an observation in para-5 of the judgment as under: ...Under Section 118 of the Act, th....