Smt. Swarna R.K.Murali @ Swarnalatha … vs Pallavi Gurudatt on 5 April, 2025

0
66

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:

It is stated that the accused is a distant relative of

the complainant and acquainted with her. The accused

sought financial assistance of Rs.4,50,000/- from the

complainant and having regard to the acquaintance, she

has paid Rs.4,50,000/- to the accused by way of cash in the

month of June 2018. The accused has promised to repay

the same within 6 months, but failed to comply it. The

accused tried to elope from Bangalore and after making

all efforts to trace the accused, the complainant got to

know that accused had purchased a house at Coimbatore.

Thereafter, also the complainant approached the accused

and asked to return the money, but she has not repaid it.

After repeated demands made by the complainant to

make the payment, the accused has issued a cheque

bearing No.160745 dated 16.10.2019 for a sum of

Rs.4,50,000/-, drawn on State Bank of India,

Bhasavanagudi Branch, Bangalore in favour of the

complainant. When the complainant presented the

cheque for encashment before the bank, it got

dishonoured for the reason ‘Funds insufficient’ as per

memo dated 18.10.2019. Thereafter, the complainant got

issued a legal notice on 09.11.2019 through registered

post demanding the accused to make payment of cheque

amount within 15 days and it was returned with an

endorsement dated 11.11.2019 and 13.11.2019 as ‘door

lock and intimation’. Thereafter, the complainant again

issued second notice to the accused to both addresses on

27.11.2019, but the accused wantonly avoided the same

as such, it returned with an endorsement as ‘No

response’. However, the accused has not repaid the

amount. Hence the complainant has constrained to file

the present complaint.

[ad_1]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here