HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1052 OF 2009
JUDGMENT:
1. This Criminal Appeal is filed by the appellant/complainant aggrieved by the acquittal recorded by the III Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad, in C.C.No.1587 of 2004, dated 04.11.2008, acquitting the accused for the offences punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. The case of the complainant is that he has lent an amount of Rs.1,90,000/- by way of investment in the mess/hotel run by 1st respondent/accused. On repeated requests, the accused issued four cheques amounting to Rs.1,90,000/- which when presented were returned unpaid for the reason of insufficient funds.
3. Learned Magistrate having examined PW1 on behalf of complainant and marking Exs.P1 to P16, found the respondent not guilty for the offences, for the following reasons;
2
a) The complainant has failed to make out a case of debt against the 1st respondent/accused.
b) According to the evidence of PW1, there is no proof whatsoever to show that Rs.1,90,000/- was in fact invested by the complainant with the accused in his business.
c) Further, when there is partnership deed and the deed is not cancelled, the lending becomes doubtful
4. The reasons given by learned Magistrate are based on record. When the complainant himself claims that the amount was invested in the business which was run on partnership basis, the question of liability interse between the partners does not arise, unless there are any conditions in the said partnership deed. The partners in the partnership firm are equally responsible for the losses and profits that they incur in the business, unless specified in the partnership deed. Since there is nothing on record to suggest that for the investment amount of the complainant, the accused would be liable. In the said circumstances, the findings of the learned Magistrate cannot be said to be improbable or incorrect.
3
6. Since, there is no infirmity in the reasoning given by the learned Magistrate while dismissing the complaint, this Court feels there are no grounds in the appeal.
7. Accordingly, the Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed.
_________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 23.09.2022 tk 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1052 OF 2009 Dated: 23.09.2022 tk