answer is that it was by PW1. In as much as the complainant has not adduced any independent evidence to substantiate his case that he gave Rs.55,000/- to DW1 on 12.2.1997 in discharge of which Ext.P1 was issued in his favour by the accused putting the date 12.3.1997 and the evidence and circumstances available would go to show that at the time when credit facility was granted to the accused by the Thops Colour Lab, Pathanamthitta, three signed blank cheques were obtained from him by PW1 and the writings were subsequently written in Ext.P1, and admittedly the accused was a commission agent of the Thops Colour Lab, Pathanamthitta from September 1996 onwards where PW1 is also working, I am of the view that Ext.P1 was not properly executed by DW1 in favour of PW1, that it is not supported by consideration and that the case put forward by the accused that three blank signed cheques were obtained from him by PW1 when credit facility was given to him from the Thops Colouor Lab and the present complaint was filed by making use of one of the blank cheques by PW1 who is a close relation of the owner of the Thops Colour Lab when the amount due to the accused was demanded is true. If that be so, I find that the case of PW1 that the accused had received a sum of Rs.55,000/- from him on 12.2.1997 and in discharge of the said debt,
