✦ High Court of India · 13 Oct 2010

THE HlGH v. I nder

Case Details High Court of India · 13 Oct 2010

have heard learned counsel for t he pet it ionerand in personand have gone t hrought he recordsoft he case Learned counscl t he pet it ionerhas subm ined t hat t he I eam ed Addit ional Sessions Judgehas accept edt he revlsion pet it iononly t he groundt hat t here is no liabilit yof t he bearer of t he chequeieee accusedagainstt he t hat The case oft he accused st ood guarant orfor t he repaym entof t he debt s of BrijMohan 1 C 0 C I 0 I Z r I 08 m 7 The Z 1CllS can be flled againstt he guarant oralso ln view of aut horit y Lt d vse Beem na Shabeer and anot her AI R 2002 Suprem e Court 3014 The debt soft he principaldebt or is ext ensivewit h t he debt of G guarant orSo it cannot be said t hat t herewas no debt 1e no legalI iabilit y The im pugnedorder is liable t o be set aside on t his groundalone Respondentwho is in person has supporledt he im pugned j udgm entand has subm it t edt hat Brij Mohan has different account No 1193 whereast he chequein quest ionwas bearingaccount Nol 194 1 belonging t o t he I t is adm it t edby t he counsel for t he part iest hat t here is no I iabilit yin respectof t he loan am ount of t he respondentThe chequein quest ion1S not in respect of liabilit yof Brij Mohan I n fact com plainantfllcd com plaintunder Sect ion 138 of t he Act againstBrij Bat ra Am it Sh. Charanj it Bat ra 12: 03 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh t he JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 448 Crim inalMisc NoM 15 of 2006 4 Mohan regarding t he sam e ainountwhich has been claim ed from t he accused in t he I n t hat coinplaintBrij Mohan was declared offcnderand t hat flle has been consignedt o records in t he year 2003 lt is subm it t ed t hat t he and Brij Mohan have raised loan t from t he Different blank chequesused t o be t aken by t he from t hem when t he I oan is advanced The blank cheque 0 3 I C5 1 I C 7 Z issuedby t he in respectof his loan am ount has been used by t he com plainant111t he presentcase There is no agreem entof placedon t he flle by t he So t his fact clearlyshows t hat had not st oodguarant orfor t he repaym entof t he loan So t he aut horit yI eCDS Lt ds case fsupral m ent ionedabove does not help t he pet it ionerin any m anner 1 havcconsidered t he subm issionsm ade by bot h t he sides and havegone t hrought hc recordsoft he case lt is adm it t edbyt he I earnedcounsel for t he pet it ionert hat Brij Mohan raisedI oan from t he Sect ion138 of t he Act wcre init iat ed againsthim lt is also not disput ed t hat said Brij Mohan was declared proclaim edoffender and t hat Ole was consignedt o record room in t he year 2003 The back side of t he cheque cont alns account No 194 which belongedt o t he and it 1S also not disput edt hat account of Brij Mohan was differeni So t he chequein quest ioncannot be said t o be in respectof liabilit yof Brij Mohan cannot Ole t wo undcr Sect ion 138 of t he Act againstBrij Mohan t he principaldebt or and Bat ra Am it Sh. Charanj it Bat ra 12: 03 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh againstt he respondentwho is allegedt o be a guarant or JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 449 1 Crim inalMisc NoMl 15of 2006 5 m r 0 C I C5 Z a5 1I 7 Z I t is not t hat t here is no I egalliabilit yof accused of his loan account as all t he am ount has been st at edt o be paidbyhim From t he perusaloft he com plaintunder Sect ion 138oft he Act it is clear t hat it is nowhere m ent ionedt hat any guarant eeagreem ent was execut edbyt he accused in respectof t he loan of Brij Mohan So t he aut horit yleCeDeSeLt des case 4supralrelicd upon by t he leam ed counsel fort he pet it ionerdoes not helpt he pet it ionerln any m anner I n view of t he above discussion pet it ionunder Sect ion 482 CrPC is wit houtany m erit and t he sam e st andsdism issed A copy of t his j udgm entbe sent t o t he t rial Court for st rict I CCPUR1 I JUDGE 1 2010 SVe 1 f 19 ry5 Bat ra Am it Sh. Charanj it Bat ra 12: 03 True Scannend Copy Of Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:20 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments