Skip to main content
Niyamam AI Niyamam AI

Main navigation

  • Home
  • Lawyer Login
  • Lawyer Registration
  • About us
  • Contact
S.T. 32/2022

Case between Thomas C Kondody vs Mohandas regarding complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act

Court
THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE – V KOTTAYAM
Judge
Smt. Indu P Raj
Order Date
2025-12-30
Duration
approximately-5 years 5 months
Case Code No.
32
Case Closed
Tue, 12/30/2025 - 12:00

Judgement document from eCourt website

Judgment Document
Save Case Find Similar Cases

Case Summary

This is a complaint filed by Thomas C Kondody against Mohandas alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complaint involves a dishonoured cheque issued by the accused in discharge of a debt.

Judgment Outcome

Plaintiff Won
Interim Order
The accused Mohandas is found guilty of committing the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He is sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and directed to pay compensation of ₹1,00,000/- to the complainant.
Judgment Favored
Plaintiff
Relief Granted
Compensation of ₹1,00,000/- to the complainant
Case Type
Criminal Case
Final Judgment
No
The accused Mohandas is found guilty of committing the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He is sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month and directed to pay compensation of ₹1,00,000/- to the complainant.
Why Plaintiff Won:
The statutory requirements under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act stand satisfied.
Losing Side's Weaknesses:
Not available
Supporting Evidence
Once the execution of the cheque is admitted, the statutory presumptions under Sections 118(a) and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arise in favour of the holder of the cheque. The defence has failed to rebut the statutory presumptions even on the standard of preponderance of probabilities.

Judgment Evidence:

In the result; the accused is convicted under section 255(2) Cr.PC. The accused is sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month. The accused is directed to pay 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) as compensation to the complainant under Section 357(1) CrPC, together with interest at 9% per annum from the date of cheque till realisation.

Parties Involved

Parties

Party Role
Plaintiff
Party Name
Thomas C Kondody
Party Age
51
Relation
S/o
Party Role
Defendant
Party Name
Mohandas
Plaintiffs Documents
Cheque dated 08-06-2020, Dishonour memo dated 09-06-2020, Copy of the lawyers notice dated 26-06-2020.
Defendants Documents
Copy of reply notice

Advocates

Party Role
Plaintiff
Advocate Name
K C Sudheer
Appearance Type
Main Counsel
Party Role
Defendant
Advocate Name
Sajith C George
Appearance Type
Main Counsel

Reliefs

Relief Type: Damages
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The accused is directed to pay 1,00,000/- as compensation to the complainant.
Evidence:
The accused is directed to pay 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) as compensation to the complainant under Section 357(1) CrPC, together with interest at 9% per annum from the date of cheque till realisation.
Relief Type: Imprisonment
Outcome: Granted
Description:
The accused is sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month.
Evidence:
The accused is sentenced to simple imprisonment for one month.
Relief Type: Imprisonment
Outcome: Granted
Description:
In default of payment of compensation, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month.
Evidence:
In default of payment of compensation, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

Documents & Evidence

Document Type: Cheque
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The cheque dated 08-06-2020 was issued by the accused towards discharge of a legally enforceable debt.
Reference:
Ext.P1
Document Type: Dishonour memo
Submitted By: Unknown
Relevance:
The dishonour memo proves that the cheque was dishonoured for insufficiency of funds.
Reference:
Ext.P2
Document Type: Lawyers notice
Submitted By: Plaintiff
Relevance:
The statutory notice demanding the cheque amount was duly served on the accused.
Reference:
Ext.P3
Document Type: Reply Notice
Submitted By: Defendant
Relevance:
The reply notice was referenced in the defence but contains admissions regarding the transaction.
Reference:
Ext.D1
Document Type: Certificate
Submitted By: Court
Relevance:
The certificate by the branch in charge confirms the dishonour of the cheque due to lack of funds.
Reference:
Ext.X1

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
2022

Case Flags

Cheque-Related Case
Imprisonment Involved
Nature of Cheque Case
Cheque Dishonour under Section 138 N.I. Act
Imprisonment Duration
1 month

Quick Facts

Location
Kottayam
District
Kottayam
State
Kerala
Court Establishment
Munsiff Court, Kottayam
Case Filed
Wed, 07/15/2020 - 12:00
Case Closed
Tue, 12/30/2025 - 12:00
From
Fri, 08/01/2025 - 12:00
To
Wed, 12/31/2025 - 12:00
Outcome Confidence
90%

Involved Entities

Similar Cases

Case between M/s. Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd. vs Mr. John V.V. regarding offence under Section 138 of N.I Act
COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE – IV
Criminal Case Defendant Won
Case between M/s. M.M Publications Ltd. vs P S Mohammed Basheer regarding offence under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act
IN THE COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-V
Criminal Case Defendant Won
Case between Sanju Raju vs Rajesh P.R. regarding dishonor of cheque
COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE – IV
Criminal Case Defendant Won
Case between Sanju Raju vs Rajesh P.R. regarding offence punishable U/s. 138 of N.I Act
COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE – IV
Criminal Case Defendant Won
Case between Shriram Transport Finance Co.Ltd vs Abey regarding dishonor of cheque
COURT OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE – IV
Criminal Case Defendant Won