M/S Iifl Samasta Finance Ltd vs Sri Narashimha Murthy
2024 Latest Caselaw 12799 Kant

Karnataka High Court

M/S Iifl Samasta Finance Ltd vs Sri Narashimha Murthy on 7 June, 2024

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                                   -1-
                                                                  NC: 2024:KHC:19792
                                                              CRL.A No. 591 of 2024




                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                               DATED THIS THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE, 2024

                                                BEFORE
                      THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR
                                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 591 OF 2024
                      BETWEEN:

                          M/S IIFL SAMASTA FINANCE LTD
                          (ERSTWHILE SAMSTA MICRO FINANCE LTD.,)
                          REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY
                          KARUNAKARA NAYAK
                          AT 110/3, 1ST FLOOR
                          LALBHAG MAIN ROAD,
                          KRISHNAPPA LAYOUT
                          BENGALURU - 560 027.
                                                                        ...APPELLANT
                      (BY SRI. HARISHA A S, ADVOCATE)
Digitally signed by
LAKSHMINARAYANA       AND:
MURTHY RAJASHRI
Location: HIGH
COURT OF
KARNATAKA                 SRI NARASHIMHA MURTHY
                          MAJOR
                          R/AT HARACHANAHALLI 62
                          TIPTUR, TUMAKURU
                          KARNAT AKA 572 201
                                                                      ...RESPONDENT
                      (BY SRI. RANGEGOWDA N R, ADVOCATE)

                              THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 378(4)
                      CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING TO SET
                      ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.02.2024 PASSED BY THE IX
                      A.S.C.J. AND A.C.M.M., COURT OF SMALL CAUSES JUDGE, MEMBER -
                      MACT,     BENGALURU   (SCCH-7)     IN   C.C.NO.6635/2022   AND
                              -2-
                                            NC: 2024:KHC:19792
                                         CRL.A No. 591 of 2024




CONSEQUENTLY      CONVICT          AND      SENTENCE       THE
ACCUSED/RESPONDENT FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE UNDER
SECTION 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT.

     THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ADMISSSION, THIS DAY, THE

COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


                      JUDGMENT

This appeal is by appellant praying to set-aside the

Judgment dated 13.02.2024 passed in C.C.No.6635/2022

on the file of IX Additional Small Causes Judge and ACMM,

Court of Small Causes Judge, Member-MACT, Bengaluru,

whereunder the respondent/accused has been acquitted

for the offence punishable Under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instrument Act.

2. It is the case of the complainant that the

respondent-accused has borrowed loan from the

appellant-company and for making re-payment of the

amount the respondent-accused has issued a cheque for a

sum of Rs.1,58,720/- and same came to be dishonored.

3. The respondent-accused taken up the defence that

he has not borrowed any loan from the appellant and he is

NC: 2024:KHC:19792

not due any amount to appellant. The appellant has not

produced any loan documents to establish that the

respondent-accused had borrowed the loan amount from

the appellant and he was due a sum of Rs.1,58,270/- as

on the date of issuance of cheque-Ex.P4. The appellant

has not produced any loan application, documents stated

to have been executed by the respondent-accused while

availing loan and statement of loan account.

4. In the absence of the said documents, the Learned

Magistrate has rightly held that the appellant has failed to

establish that the cheque has been issued for repayment

of legally enforceable debt. Hence, there are no grounds

to admit the appeal.

Accordingly, appeal is dismissed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

RL