2020 (2) TMI 1110

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by the complainant. Before S.T. No.4614/2006 was transferred, it was pending trial on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate, Thiruvananthapuram, as S.T. No.1209/2006. 2. The appellant is a registered consumer credit company represented in the complaint by its Assistant Manager. The case against the first respondent/accused is that he issued Ext.P1 cheque dated 07.06.2006 for a sum of Rs. 21,100/- in the name of the complainant/company drawn on Indian Overseas Bank, Neyyattinkara branch in partial discharge of debt incurred by him. The cheque was later dishonoured on presentment for want of sufficient funds at the credit of the accused. The complainant gave due intimation of dishonour and sought discharge of liability by giving not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....This finding of the court below is assailed in this appeal.   5. I heard the learned counsel for the appellant. Even though notice of appeal was served on the accused, he did not appear and contest the appeal. 6. The sole question that survives in this appeal is, as to whether Ext.P6 could be regarded a valid document under law as being sufficient to authorise PW1 to prosecute the complaint on behalf of the complainant. The other finding of the court that the accused issued Ext.P1 cheque in discharge of legally enforceable debt does not appear to be worthy of any interference. 7. It is proved that Ext.P1 cheque arose out of a hire purchase transaction between the complainant and the accused. The accused does not dispute the tr....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... signatory to Ext.P6 was not examined nor the document was sought to be proved in any legal manner. It was sought to be tendered in evidence through PW1, whose authority itself was under challenge. The conduct of the signatory to Ext.P6 in having addressed the Chief Judicial Magistrate before whom the case has been tried and sought to tender the document in evidence is not in any way appreciable. Having regard to the lack of proper conduct and also the casual manner in which the document was sought to be brought in evidence which the complainant considered to be material, the view taken by the court below in rejecting Ext.P6 as not being valid cannot be faulted. In my view also, Ext.P6 was rightly dismissed as being inadmissible. 9. The ....