Disposed

Rattanlal Bakshomal Kundani v. Rajendra S/O Ladakchand Jain and Anr.

Bombay HC4 Jul 2013REVN/111/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a criminal revision application concerning offences under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The High Court quashed pending proceedings following the parties' settlement and consent terms, ordering the applicant to deposit litigation costs.

What did the court decide?

Quashed proceedings under CC. Nos. 206/SS/2008, 196/SS/2009 and 137/SS/2010; applicant to deposit Rs. 25,000 costs.

Rattanlal Bakshomal Kundani Vs Rajendra S/O Ladakchand Jain… — Cheque Dishonour | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

revn111-13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

rpa

¶4

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.111 OF 2013 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.131 OF 2013 AND

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.132 OF 2013 WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.112 OF 2013 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.133 OF 2013 AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.134 OF 2013 WITH CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.113 OF 2013 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.135 OF 2013 AND CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.136 OF 2013

Rattanlal B. Kundani

.. Applicant

Vs.

Rajednra L. Jain & Anr. .. Respondents

¶10

Mr. Suresh Malkani, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. A. R. Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent No.2 – State.

¶11

CORAM : K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATED : JULY 4, 2013.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Heard.

¶14

2 Original complainant Rajendra (Respondent No.1

¶15

herein) is present in the Court and Consent Terms are tendered,

¶16

1/3

¶17

revn111-13

¶18

accepting that the matter is resolved arising out of CC. Nos. 206/SS/2008, 196/SS/2009 and 137/SS/2010, then pending decided by the Metropolitan Magistrate 14^th Court, Girgaum, Mumbai for offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

¶19

3 The Consent Terms illustrate the cheque amount in the three cases was Rs.13,50,000/-, (Rs. Thirteen Lacs Fifty Thousand only) out of which Rs.2,70,000/- (Rs. Two Lacs Seventy Thousand only) during the pendency of Appeal was deposited. The applicant – accused has paid Rs. 6,00,000/- (Rs. Six Lacs only) by demand draft. The original complainant has accepted such payments as final settlement as additionally Rs.4,80,000/- (Rs. Four Lacs Eighty Thousand only) are to be paid by the applicant on or before 15^th November, 2013.

¶20

4 The Applicant Rattanlal B. Kundani is present. He confirms writing of releasing payment of Rs.4,80,000/(Rs. Four Lacs Eighty Thousand only) to the respondent – original complainant on or before 15^th November, 2013. The Applicant Rattanlal confirm his signature on the Consent Terms.

¶21

2/3

¶22

In the light of the parties having reach settlement, in terms of Section 147 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881, the proceedings questioned subject of CC. Nos. 206/SS/2008, 196/SS/2009 and 137/SS/2010 are decided by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Court confirmed in Appeal are quashed and set aside. The applicant to deposit costs of Rs. 25,000/(Rs. Twenty Five Thousand Only) in the High Court Legal Services Committee, Mumbai up to 18^th August, 2013. All Revision Applications and Criminal Applications are disposed of in above terms. The applicant is at liberty to withdraw deposited amount with accrued interest without making any application.

¶23

(K. U. CHANDIWAL, J.)

¶24

3/3

Rattanlal Bakshomal Kundani v. Rajendra S/O Ladakchand Jain and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rattanlal Bakshomal Kundani v. Rajendra S/O Ladakchand Jain and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan Ramchandra Wadhwa Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rishi Muni Agarwal Vs the Inspector of Police, Cbi/Seb and Anr.

Rupali Pravinkumar Jagtap Vs Pravinkumar Sadashiv Jagtap and Ors.

Vijaysingh Ramkrishna Verma Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

V. R. Krishnan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Manisha Mahesh Belose Vs Sandip Vithoba Jadhav and Ors.