Madras High Court
M/S.Sri Krishna Chit Funds (P) ... vs M.Rajarathinam on 26 April, 2023
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 26.04.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
M/s.Sri Krishna Chit Funds (P) Limited,
Sattur,
Through its Manager,
R.M.Ananth ... Appellant/Complainant
Vs.
M.Rajarathinam ... Respondent/Accused
PRAYER : Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378 of Cr.P.C to call for
the records relating to the Judgment dated 23.08.2013 made in
S.T.C.No.454 of 2007 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.II, Sattur and set aside the same and convict the respondent
and award compensation to the appellant herein.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Antony Arul Raj
For Respondent : Mr.D.Dhana Chandra Prakash
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
JUDGMENT
This appeal has been preferred as against the order of
acquittal passed in S.T.C.No.454 of 2007 on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.II, Sattur, dated 23.08.2013, thereby
dismissing the complaint and acquitting the respondent for the
offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act.
2. The appellant is the complainant and the respondent
is the accused.
3.The crux of the complaint is that the respondent is
one of the subscribers for the chit to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-. As
per the said chit for the period of 20 months, a sum of Rs.25,000/-
for each month is to be paid by the subscriber. In the chit auction,
the respondent participated and had taken the chit amount. There
was a due amount of Rs.96,450/-. In order to collect the same, the
appellant also initiated proceedings before the Registrar of Chits in
proceeding No.146 of 2006 and obtained a decree on 04.09.2006.
On compliance of the said decree, the respondent issued cheque for
the said sum. It was presented for collection and the same was
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
returned dishonoured for the reason 'funds insufficient'. After
causing statutory notice, the appellant filed the complaint.
4.On the side of the appellant, he examined P.W.1 to
P.W.3 and marked Exs.P.1 to P.6 and on the side of the respondent,
no one was examined and marked Ex.D.1 to Ex.D.4.
5.On perusal of the oral and documentary evidence, the
trial Court found the respondent not guilty and acquitted him for the
offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments
Act and dismissed the complaint. Aggrieved by the same, the
present Appeal.
6.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that already he had handed over the bundle along with
change of vakalat. Therefore, he is withdrawing his appearance on
behalf of the petitioner. Even then, the petitioner did not engage
any new counsel and failed to appear before this Court either by
person or through Pleader.
7.The appellant raised the ground that the respondent
specifically admitted the signature and also the issuance of cheque.
Therefore, the appellant discharged its initial burden as
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
contemplated under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
That apart, the complaint was filed by the manager of the appellant
company. He is the person, who is acquainted with the affairs of the
company, therefore, he can very well maintain the complaint. The
cheque was issued only for the purpose of compliance of the decree
passed in chit fund case No.147 of 2006 on the file of the Deputy
Registrar of Chit, Virudhunagar. Therefore, the cheque was issued
for legally enforceable debt and as such, the respondent is liable to
be convicted for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act.
8.Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the
respondent would submit that while pending the complaint, the
execution proceeding was initiated on the strength of the decree
passed in chit fund case No.147 of 2006 on the file of the learned
Subordinate Court, Sivakasi, in which, the entire cheque amount
was paid by the respondent and after recording the full satisfaction
memo, the execution proceeding was also closed. Therefore, the
trial Court rightly dismissed the complaint and it does not require
any interference by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
9.Admittedly, the respondent issued a cheque for a sum
of Rs.96,450/- in order to comply with the decree passed in chit
fund case No.147 of 2006 on the file of the Deputy Registrar of Chit,
Virudhunagar, dated 04.09.2006. However, in its presentation, it
was returned dishonoured for the reason 'funds insufficient'.
Thereafter, the appellant initiated proceedings under Section 138 of
the Negotiable Instruments Act and while pending the said
proceeding, the appellant also initiated execution proceeding
pursuant to the decree passed in chit fund case No.147 of 2006 on
the file of the Subordinate Court, Sivakasi. In the said execution
proceeding, the respondent settled the entire cheque amount and
on receipt of the same, the appellant also filed full satisfaction
memo. It was recorded by the execution Court and terminated the
execution proceeding. Therefore, the entire cheque amount was
paid and the trial Court rightly dismissed the complaint and
acquitted the respondent. Hence, this Court finds no infirmity or
illegality in the order passed by the Court below. Accordingly, the
Criminal Appeal is dismissed.
26.04.2023
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes
ps
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
To
The Judicial Magistrate No.II,
Sattur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
ps
CRL.A.(MD).No.190 of 2014
26.04.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
