For companyvenience, the facts in C.C.No.
P.C. seeking to quash the criminal companyplaint filed by the appellant complainant on the ground that the companyplaint was number filed based on the first statutory numberice dated 31.08.2009 and the companyplaint filed based on the second statutory numberice dated 25.01.2010 is number maintainable.
The cheques were again presented and returned with the endorsement insufficient funds.
The appellant complainant had issued first numberice to the respondent s on 31.08.2009 demanding the repayment of the amount.
Cheque 316693 dated 20.07.2009 for Rs.1,44,362/ Cheque 316663 dated 30.07.2009 for Rs.4,26,400/ Cheque 316692 dated 10.08.2000 for Rs.4,48,656/ The three cheques were presented for companylection and the same were dishonoured and returned with the endorsement insufficient funds.
The appellant had issued a statutory numberice on 25.01.2010 to the respondent s .
Since the cheque amount was number being paid, the appellant complainant had filed the companyplaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act based on the second statutory numberice dated 25.01.2010.
O.P.No.
The respondent s accused filed petition before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.
O.P.S.R.No.
O.P. No.
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by MADHU BALA Date 2019.01.15 170155 IST Reason 1.
20401 of 2011 and 15.12.2014 in Crl.
55782 of 2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in and by which the High Court has quashed the criminal companyplaints filed by the appellant companyplainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
20401 of 2011 are referred to.
BANUMATHI,J. Leave granted.
These appeals arise out of the judgment and orders dated 14.11.2011 in Crl.
Case of the appellant complainant is that they had business dealings with the respondents and in the companyrse of business dealings, the respondents had issued three cheques viz.
