I.D.A.Consumables vs Ambuja R on 5 March, 2025

0
7

This case arises out of the private complaint filed
by the complainant against the accused under section
C.C.NO.30491/2019

200 of Cr.P.C., for an offence punishable under section
138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. The case of the complainant’s in brief is as
under:

It is the case of the complainant is that the
complainant is a partnership firm carrying the business
of selling and buying IT products like computers,
printers, ribbon, plastic cards, thermal printers etc. One
Sri.Suresh Pandith introduced the husband of the
accused i.e., Manjunath.S.G to the Managing partner of
the complainant in the month of October 2014. Further
the friendship between the Manjunath.S.G and the
Managing Partner of the complainant has insidiously
turned to seeking of financial assistance by
Manjunath.S.G. The complainant on 29.10.2014 lent a
sum of Rs.3,00,000/- to him infact the same was turned
by him. Further stated that the husband of the accused
represent the complainant that he has a mining
company under proposal to invest in the same
company to earn profit. Thereafter, he posed the
complainant that he has made an application to
Government seeking permission to do mining and the
said application is under process. In addition
Manjunath.S.G posed that the permission sought by
him to do mining will be obtained at the earliest and
hence sought for financial assistance in the form of
investment. Based on the representation made by him,
the complainant paid a sum of Rs.70,00,000/- in cash
C.C.NO.30491/2019

in presence of Sri.Suresh Pandith, Sri.Babu and
Sri.Deepak, The complainant has also transferred a
sum of Rs.2,72,40,000/- through RTGS & NEFT.
Further Manjunath.S.G has posed the complainant that
the permission sought by him from the Government
was declined, hence the complainant sought for
reimbursement of Rs.2,72,00,000/-. Accordingly
Manjunath.S.G has reimbursed a sum of
Rs.1,08,00,000/-, however he was still liable to pay a
sum of Rs.1,64,00,000/- as admitted the said liability on
11.12.2018 he executed the Memorandum of
Understanding in favour of the complainant.



Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here