R.G.Prasad vs R. Mohanram on 6 March, 2025

Date:

This case is registered against the accused for the

offence punishable U/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments

Act.

2. Factual matrix of the complainant’s case is as

under:

The complainant known the accused from 15 years.

The accused is in the business of Pharmaceuticals

Distributor running in the name and style of M/s

Anugraha Pharmaceuticals. The accused had approached

the complainant for a hand loan of Rs.25,00,000/- in the

month of May 2013 to invest in his business and promised

to return the said amount within December 2015 with

nominal bank interest. Considering the same, the

complainant had lent loan of Rs.23,00,000/- between

13.05.2013 to 22.05.2013 through cheques to invest in his

business. Within a month, the accused has repaid a sum

of Rs.4,00,000/- by way of cash and executed on demand

promissory note and consideration receipt dated

12.06.2013 for remaining amount of Rs.19,00,000/-. He

assured to repay it within 31.12.2015. However, the

accused has not repaid the amount as agreed. After

repeated requests made by the complainant to repay the

amount, the accused has issued cheque bearing

No.279362 dated 23.03.2016 for Rs.19,00,000/-, drawn on

Canara Bank, Hanumanthanagar Branch, Bangalore in

favour of the complainant. When it was presented to the

bank, the said cheque got dishonoured for the reason

‘Funds insufficient’ vide memo dated 30.03.2016. The

complainant got issued legal notice on 23.04.2016

demanding the accused to make payment of cheque

amount within 15 days and it has been served on the

accused on 25.04.2016. But, the accused has given false

reply on 04.05.2016 and not repaid the amount. Hence

the complainant has constrained to file the present

complaint.



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Share post:

Subscribe

spot_imgspot_img

Popular

More like this
Related