Dismissed

Madhava Reddy G v. Dr Mounappa Pattar @ Mounesh Pattar

Karnataka HC23 Sept 2016CRL.P/947/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed a criminal petition for quashing proceedings under Section 138 NI Act. The court noted the petitioner had obtained bail and a settlement was reached at Lok Adalath. The petition, alleging coercion and lack of jurisdiction filed ex-parte, was dismissed and earlier interim stay vacated.

What did the court decide?

Interim stay ordered earlier vacated; petition dismissed; respondent permitted to withdraw deposit and recover balance.

Madhava Reddy G Vs Dr Mounappa Pattar @ Mounesh Pattar — Cheque Dishonour | Karnataka HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 23^RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2016

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANAND BYRAREDDY

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION No.947 OF 2016

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

Madhava Reddy G., #92/2, Srivenkataeshwara Nilaya, C/o. Mahalakshmi and M.C.Puttaraju, I Floor, T.R.Mill Circle, Behind Rajeshwari Temple, 9^th Cross, Conservancy Road, Near Shruthi Medials, Bengaluru – 560 018.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(By Shri K. Shyamsundar, Advocate)

¶11

AND:

¶12

Dr. Mounappa Pattar @ Mounesh Pattar, Son of Basavantappa K. Pattar, Dhanvantri Clinic, #18, II Main, II Cross, Nanjamba Agrahara,

¶13

¶14

Chamarajpet, Bengaluru – 560 018.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

(By Shri Mahesh S Kammar and Shri Ashok K.L., Advocates) *****

¶17

This Criminal Petition filed under Section 482 code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, praying to quash the entire proceedings pending on the file of the XII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore in C.C.No.8649/2015.

¶18

This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission this day, the court made the following:

¶19

O R D E R

¶20

The learned counsel for the petitioner remains absent.

¶21

The petitioner was the accused before the court below

¶22

on allegation of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The petitioner had entered appearance through counsel on service of summons and had obtained bail. Thereafter, when the matter was pending before the court below, it was referred to the Lok Adalath. At the Lok Adalath, a joint memo was filed, whereby the petitioner had undertaken to repay the amount of Rs.3,00,000/- within a

¶23

¶24

period of four months. The matter was disposed of by the Lok Adalath recording the submission. The joint memo was signed by the complainant, his counsel, the accused and his counsel.

¶25

It is thereafter that the present petition was filed claiming that the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to try the case, that the petitioner had not committed any offence, the case was filed without jurisdiction and that when the matter was referred to Lok Adalat, he was not permitted to read the joint memo and his signature was obtained by force, etc. It is on those allegations that the court has readily granted an interim order while issuing notice, on the further condition that he shall deposit a sum of Rs.50,000/-.

¶26

Though there is no indication of such deposit in the order-sheet, the learned counsel for the respondent states that he has verified that there is such a deposit. If there is any such deposit, the respondent is entitled to withdraw the same.

¶27

¶28

Insofar as the petition is concerned, it lacks merit. The interim order of stay granted earlier stands vacated. The petition is dismissed.

¶29

The respondent is permitted to withdraw the amount in deposit and take coercive measures to recover the balance

amount.

Sd/-

JUDGE

Madhava Reddy G v. Dr Mounappa Pattar @ Mounesh Pattar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Madhava Reddy G v. Dr Mounappa Pattar @ Mounesh Pattar

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

Mr M M Kariappa Vs a Madhava Rao

M/S Heramba Leasing Ltd. Vs Smt B K Krishna Kumari

Sri Mohan Bahadur Vs State of Karnataka

Manjunath N Vs State of Karnataka by

M Nataraju Vs State by Badanavalu Police

Sri Anantha @ Anantharam Reddy Vs State of Karnataka