PAVANI RAMAKRISHNAYYA Vs. CHEKURU PITCHAYYA NAIDU
LAWS(APH)-1955-3-40
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Decided on March 09,1955

Pavani Ramakrishnayya Appellant
VERSUS
Chekuru Pitchayya Naidu Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

GOLAM HOSSAIN V. EMPEROR [REFERRED TO]
REX VS. VKRISHNAN [REFERRED TO]
HIT NARAIN MAHTON VS. BED NARAIN MISTRY [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

CHANDRA REDDY,J. - (1.)This is a petition to revise the order of the Sessions Judge, Nellore, passed in a revision petition against the order of the Stationary Sub-Magistrate, Kandukur, discharging the respondent.
(2.)The prosecution case may be briefly stated: The complainant, a pleader practising at Kanigiri, Nellore District, borrowed a sum of Rs. 3,000 from the accused and executed a promissory note on 7th March, 1947. The complainant made several payments in discharge of the debt, Rs. 100/- on 17th June, 1950; Rs. 150/- on 26th July, 1950; Rs. 100/- on 12th January, 1951; Rs. 100/- on 25th February, 1951; Rs. 1,000/- on 23rd May, 1951; Rs. 30/- on 11th June, 1951; another sum of Rs. 1,000/- sent by insured post; Rs. 20/- on 11th September, 1951; and Rs. 50/- on 18th December, 1951. The gravamen of the charge against the accused is that without giving credit for several of the payments between 17th June, 1950 and 18th December, 1951 amounting to about Rs. 600/-, he transferred the promissory note to one Sompalli Narasappa Naidu, who filed O.S. No. 114 of 1953 on the basis of the promissory note. Hence the promisee, that is the accused, was guilty of an offence either under Section 403 or Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code.
(3.)Without going into the truth of the allegations regarding the payments, the Courts below held that on the allegations no offence under either of the two sections was made out. In that view the accused was discharged.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.