Case Summary
The complainant, Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd., filed a complaint against Neethu Viswanathan for dishonouring a cheque issued for chit transactions. The accused was found not guilty as the court determined the complainant failed to establish the case.
Judgment Outcome
Judgment Favored
Defendant
Relief Granted
Case Type
Criminal Case
Final Judgment
No
The accused was acquitted and found not guilty of dishonouring a cheque issued for chit payments.
Key Reasoning:
The complainant did not establish that the accused issued the cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
The complainant did not establish that the accused issued the cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Why Defendant Won:
Not available
Not available
Supporting Evidence
The complainant could not establish that the accused has drawn Exhibit P23 cheque in discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Judgment Evidence:
In the result, the accused is found not guilty for offence punishable U/s.138 of Negotiable Instrument Act. Therefore, the accused is acquitted U/s. 255(1) Cr.P.C.
Parties Involved
Parties
- Party Role
- Plaintiff
- Party Name
- Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd.
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Party Name
- Neethu Viswanathan
- Party Age
- 38
- Relation
- D/o
Plaintiffs Documents
Certified copy of Power of Attorney, Debt acknowledgment, Guarantee deed
Defendants Documents
Advocates
- Party Role
- Complainant
- Advocate Name
- Roy Jose
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
- Party Role
- Defendant
- Advocate Name
- G. Ajith Kumar
- Appearance Type
- Main Counsel
Reliefs
Relief Type:
Other
Outcome:
Refused
Description:
The complainant's case regarding the dishonored cheque was refused.
Evidence:
In the result, the accused is found not guilty for offence punishable U/s.138 of Negotiable Instrument Act.
Documents & Evidence
Document Type:
Certified Copy of Power of Attorney
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document establishes the authority of the power of attorney holder to represent the complainant company.
Reference:
P1
Document Type:
Extract from the minutes of the Board of Directors
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document provides evidence of the resolution empowering the power of attorney holder to act on behalf of the complainant.
Reference:
P2
Document Type:
Debt acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document shows the acknowledgment of debt by the subscriber.
Reference:
P3
Document Type:
Guarantee deed
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document serves as a guarantee for the indebtedness of the subscriber.
Reference:
P4
Document Type:
Debt acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document shows another acknowledgment of debt.
Reference:
P5
Document Type:
Guarantee deed
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document outlines the guarantee related to the subscriber's debt.
Reference:
P6
Document Type:
Debt acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document further establishes the debt acknowledgment from the subscriber.
Reference:
P7
Document Type:
Guarantee deed
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document serves as a guarantee for the debt incurred by the subscriber.
Reference:
P8
Document Type:
Debt acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document once again acknowledges the subscriber's debt.
Reference:
P9
Document Type:
Guarantee deed
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document provides a guarantee related to the subscriber's chitty transaction.
Reference:
P10
Document Type:
Debt acknowledgment
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document acknowledges the debt pertinent to the chitty transaction.
Reference:
P11
Document Type:
Guarantee deed
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document secures the guarantee for the subscriber's debt.
Reference:
P12
Document Type:
Cheque
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This is the cheque that was dishonored, which is central to the complaint.
Reference:
P23
Document Type:
Dishonour memo
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document indicates that the cheque was returned due to insufficient funds.
Reference:
P24
Document Type:
Lawyer’s Notice
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document proves that notice was sent to the accused regarding the dishonored cheque.
Reference:
P25
Document Type:
Postal receipt
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This document serves as confirmation that the notice was sent.
Reference:
P26
Document Type:
Statement of Accounts
Submitted By:
Complainant
Relevance:
This provides a record of the transactions and payments related to the chits.
Reference:
P28 series
Case Classification
Case Type
Criminal Case
Category
Cheque Bounce Cases
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Common Reasons
Cheque dishonour
Case Code
S.T.
Case Code Year
2020
Case Flags
Cheque-Related Case
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour