Vipin Patidar vs Chief Manager ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 5334 Raj

[2023/RJJD/017267]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Crml Leave To Appeal No. 162/2022

Vipin Patidar S/o Ram Lal Patidar, Aged About 25 Years, Bhuvneshwari Colony, Behind Hotel Dave, In Front Of New Bus Stand, Dungarpur (Raj.).

----Appellant Versus

1. Chief Manager, Rws Real Estate And Allied Ltd., Office 604-605 The Golde Trianble Complex, In Front Of Sardar Patel Naranpura, Ahmedabad (Guj.).

2. Manager, Rws Real Estate And Allied Ltd., Office At 10-11, Chetak Complex Dahod Road, Banswara.

3. Sh. Kalpesh Malot S/o Sh. Arvind Malot, H.no. 342, Gali No. 8, In Front Of Khadi Ashram, Rati Talai, Banswara, Proprietor R.w.s. Real Estate And Allied Ltd.

----Respondents

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Jitendra Ojha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hitender Singh

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI

Order

25/05/2023

1. Upon perusal of the judgment impugned, it is revealing that

a cheque was allegedly given by the accused-respondent to the

petitioner, which upon presentation got dishonoured owing to

insufficiency of the fund in the account of the accused respondent.

Thereafter, a legal notice was issued to the accused respondent

and a complaint was too filed as per the statutory provision. The

learned trial Court took cognizance of the offence against the

accused respondent. After a full fledged trial, the learned trial

Court acquitted the accused respondent from the offence under

[2023/RJJD/017267] (2 of 2) [CRLLA-162/2022]

Section 138 of N.I. Act. There seems reasonable grounds to allow

the petitioner to prefer an appeal against the impugned judgment.

2. Accordingly, the instant application seeking leave to appeal is

allowed. The memo of leave to appeal application shall be treated

and registered as an appeal.

3. Office to proceed.

(FARJAND ALI),J 70-AnilKC/-

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)