w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Timmappa v/s M.H. Huchhu Hanumaiah


Company & Directors' Information:- M,H AND P (INDIA) PVT. LTD. [Strike Off] CIN = U99999DL1998PTC093648

Company & Directors' Information:- MH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74140DL2013PTC248880

    Criminal Appeal No. 278 of 2009

    Decided On, 23 January 2014

    At, High Court of Karnataka

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANANDA

    For the Appellant: Dinesh for R.B. Deshpande, Advocates. For the Respondent: Vijaykumar S. Jatla, R.C. Nagaraj, Advocates.



Judgment Text

(Prayer: This Criminal Appeal is filed under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C praying to set aside the judgment and order of acquittal dated 4.3.2009 passed by the II Addl. C.J. (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kadur in C.C.No.942/2007 - acquitting the respondent/accused for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.)

1. The learned Trial Judge has acquitted the accused of an offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. Therefore, complainant is before this Court.

2. I have heard Sri Dinesh, learned counsel for complainant and Sri Vijaykumar, learned counsel for accused.

3. The averments of the complaint would reveal that in the year 2004, accused was in need of money. Therefore, he approached the complainant. The complainant mortgaged his properties in favour of DCC Bank of Singatagere and raised loan of Rs3,50,000/-. The complainant gave a sum of Rs.2,50,000/- to accused with an understanding that accused shall discharge the loan and redeem the properties of the complainant mortgaged to the bank. The accused did not stand by his words. Therefore, complainant contacted the accused. The complainant on one side, the accused, his wife and his children represented by accused entered into an agreement on 18.7.2005, wherein the accused, his wife and children represented by the accused (father being guardian) agreed to discharge loan in favour of bank and agreed to repay the loan and upto date interest to the bank and get the properties redeemed. The accused did not stand by his words. Therefore, complainant and accused again entered into an agreement on 18.3.2006, wherein accused agreed to pay entire loan of Rs.2,50,000/- and the accrued interest to the bank. It is also said in the agreement that in case if accused fails to repay loan amount and upto date interest to the bank, the complainant was at liberty to take any action against the accused. The complainant was also given right to sell the properties belonging accused and appropriate the sale consideration towards the loan amount.

On 31.12.2006, accused issued a cheque in favour of the complainant for a sum of Rs.3,53,664/- being the principal amount of Rs.2,50,000/- and interest accrued thereon. The cheque was drawn on Chikmagalur Kodagu Grameena Bank, Kadur. On presentation, the cheque was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds. Thereafter, the complaint was initiated.

4. The learned Trial Judge on appreciation of evidence held that the complainant has failed to prove that as on 31.12.2006, accused was due in a sum of Rs.3,53,664/- to complainant. The complainant has not proved existence of legally recoverable debt. Therefore, presumption under Section 139 cannot be raised in favour of complainant. The learned Trial Judge has accepted defence of accused that the cheque was given as a security.

5. The learned counsel for complainant relying on a decision of the Supreme Court in AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 1898 (in case of RANGAPPA v. MOHAN) submitted that the presumption available under Section 139 of Negotiable Instruments Act, also extends to the existence of legal enforceable debt or liability. The accused has not disputed that certain cheque was drawn by him in favour of complainant. In the circumstances, the Trial Court should have raised a presumption in favour of the complainant.

6. In the decision reported in AIR 2010 SUPREME COURT 1898, the Supreme Court has held thus:

"Ordinarily in cheque bouncing cases, what the courts have to consider is whether the ingredients of the offence enumerated in Section 138 of the Act have been met and if so, whether the accused was able to rebut the statutory presumption contemplated by Section 139 of the Act"

The Supreme Court has further held that basic ingredient for raising a presumption regarding existence of legally recoverable debt is the transaction entered into between the parties.

7. In case on hand, it is specific case of the complainant that he had raised loan from DCC Bank, Singatagere by mortgaging his property and paid the same to accused who had agreed to repay the loan to the bank with the interest accrued thereon. The complainant has not produced the documents to show that he had mortgaged the property and raised loan. The complainant has not produced documents to show that as on 31.12.2006, he was due in a sum of Rs.3,53,664/- to the bank. The agreement dated 18.7.2005 (Ex.P5) relied upon by the complainant would disclose that not only the accused but also his wife had undertaken to discharge the loan. The next agreement dated 18.3.2006 (Ex.P6) relied upon by the complainant would reveal that if the accused fails to discharge loan raised by complainant from DCC Bank, the complainant was at liberty to take any action against him. The complainant is at liberty to appropriate the loan amount by selling the properties of the accused. In my considered opinion, these documents do not establish the existence of legally recoverable debt i.e. a sum of Rs.3,53,664/- as on 31.12.2006. If the complainant had raised the loan from the bank and paid the same to the accused with an understanding that accused shall repay the loan amount and interest to the bank to redeem the properties of the complainant,

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

the best evidence relating to liability of the accused was available with the bank. The complainant for the reasons best known to him, has not caused production documents to prove that as on 31.12.2006 he was due in a sum of Rs.3,53,664/- to the bank and that obligation of discharging that loan was on the accused and the accused had issued the dishonoured cheque to discharge the afore stated debt or liability. In the circumstances, the learned trial Judge was justified in acquitting the accused. There are no reasons to interfere with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

12-06-2020 M.H. Uma Maheshwari & Others Versus United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Another Supreme Court of India
03-06-2020 Tamilnadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam (TMMK), Rep. by its Chairman Prof. M.H. Jawahirullah Versus The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Chief Secretary, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-06-2020 Citizen Forum for Equality, a registered NGO, vide registration no:-MH/645/11, through its President Madhukar Ganpat Kukde Versus The State of Maharashtra, through its Chief Secretary, Mantralaya & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
01-04-2020 Mustafa MH Versus Union of India & Another Supreme Court of India
27-03-2020 Mustafa MH Versus Union of India & Others Supreme Court of India
18-12-2019 S. Hyder Ali & Others Versus M.H. Jawahirullah, President, M/s. Tamilnadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam, Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-11-2019 State Bank Of India Versus M.H. Patel & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-06-2019 M.H. Zakkir Hussain Versus Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Chennai, Represented by its Secretary & Personnel Officer & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-11-2018 M.H. Jaithoon Bee Versus The District Collector, Coimbatore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-10-2018 M/s. Ferdous Estate Pvt. Ltd., Rep., by Authorized Signatory, M.H. Ershad Ahmed, Chennai Versus The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep., by its Secretary, Housing & Urban Department, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
05-07-2018 Sathish Kini Versus Jnaneshwari M.H. Nutan & Others High Court of Karnataka
24-04-2018 M.H. Ansari & Another Versus The State by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, SPE/CBI/ACB/Chennai High Court of Judicature at Madras
20-02-2018 M.H. Santhosh & Another Versus G.M. Shreya @ Sridevi & Another High Court of Karnataka
07-12-2017 M.H. Harison Officer in Charge Police Station Kuttigala & Others Versus Baranaduge Asanka & Others Supreme Court of Sri Lanka
10-10-2017 M.H. Krishnan Versus The Commissioner of Police & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
22-08-2017 M.H. Ajmali Ali Versus State Bank of India, Represented by its Branch Manager, S. Nagarajan, Karur Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
19-08-2017 M.H. Ravivarma Versus The State of Karnataka, Represented By Its Secretary, Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
31-07-2017 M.H. Noufal Versus State of Kerala represented by Public Prosecutor High Court of Kerala
28-07-2017 The Zonal Manager, Bank of India, Bengaluru Versus M.H. Shankarappa High Court of Karnataka
17-03-2017 M.H. Syed Ibrahim Versus The Government of Tamilnadu rep. by its Secretary Highways Department Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-02-2017 Hycount Marketing Division represented by its Managing Partner, M.H. Hinsaf Versus The Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Taxes Department & Others High Court of Kerala
09-02-2017 M.H. Basheer Versus Wheels Auto Finance, Represented by V.A. Sabu & Another High Court of Kerala
07-12-2016 M.H. Syed Ibrahim Versus The Government of Tamilnadu, rep. by its Secretary, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-12-2016 M.H. Syed Ibrahim Versus The Government of Tamilnadu, rep. by its Secretary, Highways Department, Fort St. George, Chennai & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-10-2016 J. Shahjahan Versus M.H. Mohammed Mustafa High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-03-2016 Colonel M.H. Chowdhury Versus Estate Officer and Station Commander High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
17-03-2016 M.H. Mills & Industries Ltd. Versus Gunvantrai Maneklal Vichhi & Others High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
18-12-2015 M.H. Syed Ibrahim Versus The Govt. of Tamilnadu, Represented by its Secretary & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-12-2015 M.H. Hanil Kumar, Advocate Versus Union of India represented by its Principal Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
27-02-2015 M.H. Shivanna Versus Union of India, Through Secretary, Department of Posts, Dak Bhavan, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Bangalore Bench
07-10-2014 M.H. Jagannadha Rao Versus The Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Represented by its Chairman and Managing Director High Court of Andhra Pradesh
20-06-2014 M.H. Krishnamurthy Versus State Of Karnataka High Court of Karnataka
16-04-2014 MH 123, Madurai Co-operative Intensive Handloom Development Project, Madurai Versus The District Court, Melur Road, (Co-operative Tribunal), Madurai & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
21-03-2014 M.H. Hasanabba Versus State of Karnataka High Court of Karnataka
17-01-2014 Pratibha Burman, Nagpur (M.H.) Versus Union of India Through its General Manager, Bilaspur & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Bombay Bench Mumbai
05-12-2013 M.H. Honda, Near J.R. Theatre & Another Versus Sant Ram Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Chandigarh
19-11-2013 Batco Roadways Corporation, rep. by its Partner M.H. Patni Versus R. Deivanayagam, Assistant Inspector of Labour II & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
18-04-2013 M.H. Shabbir & Others Versus State of Karnataka, Dept. of Revenue, M.S. Building & Others High Court of Karnataka
25-03-2013 M.H. Jawahirullah & Others Versus Government of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary, Backward Classes & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
12-02-2013 S. Ziualla & Another Versus M.H. Shafiulla High Court of Andhra Pradesh
08-01-2013 M.H. Mahabaleshwar Versus The Joint Registrar of Co-operative Societies Limited Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
16-02-2012 M/s. Alkraft Thermo Technologies Pvt., Ltd., Rep.by its Chief General Manager M.H. Zakkir Hussain Versus The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
28-07-2011 Dr. M.H. Rahimkutty Versus The Southern Railway, Represented by General Manager, Chennai Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Thiruvananthapuram
27-07-2011 M.D. Shahbaz Alam & Another Versus M.H. Bhiwarawalla & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
25-04-2011 M/s.Bhuwalka Steel Industries Ltd., Represented by M.H. Sait Versus The Registrar, Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
22-04-2010 M.H. Abdul Rahman Versus The Secretary to Government, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
15-01-2010 M/S M.H. Polymers Private Limited, Versus Restora Coir India Limited, Intellectual Property Appellate Board
18-12-2009 M.H. Ahammed Kunju & Others Versus State Of Kerala, Rep. by Its Secretary, Local Self Government & Others High Court of Kerala
09-11-2009 AnjumanIIslams M.H. Saboo Siddik College of Engineering Versus The General Secretary, Akhil Bhartiya Kamgar Sena & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
30-06-2009 The competent Authority, Smugglers & Foreign Exchange Manipulators Versus M.H. Hameed & Another High Court of Kerala
24-04-2009 M/s. M.H. Trading Co. Versus State of West Bengal & Others High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
30-03-2009 M/s Parade Advertising and Marketing (P)Ltd. Versus M.H. Kheebathullah Prop.Vichitra Arts Complex High Court of Judicature at Madras
03-02-2009 M/s. BATCO ROADWAYS, Rep., by its Partner Mr. M.H. Patni Versus Mrs. A. Radhammal High Court of Judicature at Madras
15-07-2008 Kayum Golder Versus M.H. Md. Ally High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
29-01-2007 M.H. Kuppusamy & Others Versus The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, Rep. by its Chief Internal Audit Officer, Tamil Nadu Electricity Board, 800, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 002. High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-09-2006 M.H. Geetha Versus Manjulamma & Others High Court of Karnataka
07-05-2006 Sri. M.H. Malik Versus Sri. T. Venkataswamy Reddy High Court of Karnataka
20-10-2005 MH (by her litigation friend, Official Solicitor) (FC) (Respondent) Versus Secretary of State for the Department of Health (Appellant) and others House of Lords
10-01-2005 Jyoti Limited Versus M.H. Padhiyar High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
09-08-2004 Mh.Jahangir Versus High Court of Judicature at Calcutta
20-03-2003 M.H. Gawali versus The State of Karnataka & Others High Court of Karnataka
07-06-2002 Ayashabi Mohamed Nazeer & Others Versus M.H. Niyazi & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
29-08-2001 Commissioner of Income Tax Mumbai Versus Anjum M.H. Ghaswala and Others Supreme Court of India
04-05-2001 M.H. Tiabi Versus State of Mizoram High Court of Assam
02-03-2000 H.V. NAGENDRAPPA VERSUS M.H. HANUMAPPA High Court of Karnataka
15-06-1999 Shaikh Shafaque Anjum M.H. Versus University of Mumbai & Others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
11-02-1999 M. VITTAL RAO VERSUS M.H. RANGANATH High Court of Karnataka
29-09-1998 Gopalakrishnan Nair Versus Manager, K.P.S.P. M.H. School High Court of Kerala
24-03-1998 M.H. Shete Versus State of Maharashtra High Court of Judicature at Bombay
17-02-1998 M.H. Devendrappa Versus The Karnataka State Small Industries Development Corporation Supreme Court of India
30-10-1995 ABDULLAH JAMEEL AHMED ANSARI VERSUS M.H. SABOO SIDDIK POLYTECHNIC High Court of Judicature at Bombay
19-06-1995 M.H. CHANNABASAPPA VERSUS SPECIAL TAHSILDAR FOR LAND REFORMS, SAGAR High Court of Karnataka
01-06-1994 M.H. Khan Versus A.P. State Minorities Finance Corporation Ltd. & Others Andhra Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission Hyderabad
31-08-1989 State of Maharashtra Versus Hon'ble Mr. M.H. Kania, The Hon'ble the Chief Justice, High Court of judicature at Bombay & others High Court of Judicature at Bombay
10-11-1987 DEVENDRAPPA M.H. VERSUS KARNATAKA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION High Court of Karnataka
08-06-1981 M.H. Abdul Khader v/s Wealth Tax Officer Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
20-01-1973 G.K. Kempe Gowda Versus M.H. Boriah High Court of Karnataka
06-09-1966 K.P. RAGHAVAN Versus M.H. ABHAS High Court of Kerala
14-10-1965 M.H. TEJANI VERSUS KULSUMBAI M. JETHA High Court of Judicature at Bombay
27-02-1961 M.H. Shivaji Rao Versus Niranjanaiah High Court of Karnataka
20-03-1956 M.H. Krishnappa Versus H. Janaki Bai High Court of Karnataka