Full Text
M.A. No.6251|ZOLL
NEPAL SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through:Mr. Vinay Sharma, Adv. VETSUS BERGER PAINT INDIA LTD
Through:Mr. Respondent para
08.08.2011 Ld. counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that in
2&3 of the complaint he has stated as under:-
"2. That the Accused in order to discharge his liability against Bills No.4581-4582 both dated 26.L2.2008 for Rs.9,349/- and
Rs.33,2671- respectively issued a cheque bearing No.037728 dated L5.2.2009 for
Rs.42,4001- (Rupees forty two thousand four hundred only) drawn on Bank of India.
ORDER
3. That the Complainant deposited the aforesaid cheque with his Banker, lDBl Bank Ltd., Delhi but the Accused's Banker returned o/o L. ft^ 2011:DHC:8938,1,, the said cheque unpaid with the remakrs,,PAYMENT STOPPED BY ATTACHMENT ORDER' contained in Bank Return Memo of the Accused Banker dated 22.4.2009."
2. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has further pointed towards list of witnesses filed on behalf of the complainant, which is reproduced below:
2. Clerk concerned, Through Bank Manager, lDBl Bank, B-3/1, Ashok Vihar, Phacell,(AVP), Delhi With the Statement of Account of the Com plaina nt. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has further pointed as under:- "That the Complainant deposited the aforesaid cheque with his Banker, lDBl Bank Ltd., New Delhi but the Accused's Banker returned the cheque unpaid with the remarks,,PAYMENT STOPPED BY ATTACHMENT ORDER' contained in Bank Return Memo of the Accused Banker dated 22.4..2009."
4. Ld. counsel for the petitioner has further pointed towards the Return Memo Report which reads as under:- "Presenting Bank Name: STATE BANK OF HYDERABAD Presenting Branch Name:KAILASH COLONY(KLC)
3.
4.
3. ra Presenting Branch Address:Delhi NEW DELHI Branch Code:007 MICR Code:11-0013056 NO.00700/007001 DATE:22-Apr-2009 Dear Sir/Madam, Being unable to obtain payment of the enclosed cheque/Draft No.037728 for Rs.42,400.00/- drawn on BANK OF INDIA -ATPAR BRANCH. We return it to you herewith for the reason given below: G ?,1; t"Ifrill.*"t::o oilS"'"'Tilllo"o".:' vour 0000005 2050210456 account. "
5. Ld. counsel for the petitioner submits that while drafting the complaint, the complainant has gone out of context and remained inconsistent with the facts of the case.
6. He further submits that on this complaint the learned trial court has issued summons vide its order dated 05.11.09 against the petitioner/alleged accused.
7. Ld. counsel for the respondent submits and admit that these t. are the typographical mistakes and he wishes to correct the same.
10. The CRL.M.C. 16L212011 is disposed of in the above terms. Crl. M.A. No.6251/2O11 Dismissed as being infructuous. @rysuREsH KAIT,J AUGUST 08, 2011 rRS D