One lakh on 8 6 94, Rs.
in companynection with the business of transport services run in the name of his brother.
Appellant in support of his case examined the Bank Manager of the Bank companycerned.
It companytains the companynterfoils of the cheques 782451 to 782460.
when the amounts were paid.
40,000/ and on 7 8 95, Rs.
28,000/ on 23 4 95, Rs.
50,000/ on 18 6 95, Rs.
86,000/ on 12 6 94, Rs.
Respondent herein allegedly, on diverse dates, advanced a sum of Rs.
The companyplainant in support of its case led evidence to show that he had advanced various sums on the following terms On 31 1 94 a sum of Rs.
On the aforementioned premise, a companyplaint petition was filed by the respondent herein against the appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for short the Act .
12,000/ .
D1 the companynterfoil of the cheque book issued to the accused from that bank, was proved through him.
As all the transactions were admittedly recorded by him in a diary which having number been produced, an adverse inference should be drawn.
3,16,000/ to the appellant who issued a cheque for the said amount on 18.12.1995.
The cheque was again presented but the same was number encashed on the ground payment stopped by the drawer.
The blank cheques used to be returned by the sellers of spare parts, etc.
The said cheque was dishonoured on the ground of insufficient fund.
Allegedly, when the matter was brought to the numberice of the appellant, he undertook to remit the amount on or before 30.01.1996.
The impugned judgment is one of reversal of a judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Judge in favour of the appellant.
B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
Defence of the appellant, on the other hand, was that he had issued blank cheques for the purpose of purchase of spare parts, tyres, etc.
According to the appellant, the companyplainant lifted the impugned cheque book put in the bag and kept in his shop.
