Sree gokulam Chits and Finance Co(P) Ltd. vs Seenath A K — 1115/2021
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138. Disposed: Contested--ACQUITTED on 05th June 2026.
ST - SUMMARY TRIAL
CNR: KLKN240023722021
Filing Number
1115/2021
Filing Date
21-12-2021
Registration No
1115/2021
Registration Date
21-12-2021
Court
J F C M, Mattannur
Judge
1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Decision Date
05th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ACQUITTED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Sree gokulam Chits and Finance Co(P) Ltd.
Adv. P V Dinesh Babu
Respondent(s)
Seenath A K
Hearing History
Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate
Disposed
Order/Judgement
For further hearing
Order/Judgement
FOR HEARING
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 05-06-2026 | Disposed |
| 01-06-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 26-05-2026 | For further hearing |
| 20-05-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 18-05-2026 | FOR HEARING |
Final Orders / Judgements
Case Summary: STC.No.1115/2021 The accused, Seenath A.K., was acquitted of charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that while the complainant proved statutory formalities were met and the cheque was executed, critical discrepancies in documentary evidence—including inconsistencies in the chit number, conflicting amounts in the promissory note versus receipt, and unexplained variance in the foreman's identity—created reasonable doubt about the underlying liability, thereby rebutting statutory presumptions and warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Case Summary: STC.No.1115/2021 The accused, Seenath A.K., was acquitted of charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that while the complainant proved statutory formalities were met and the cheque was executed, critical discrepancies in documentary evidence—including inconsistencies in the chit number, conflicting amounts in the promissory note versus receipt, and unexplained variance in the foreman's identity—created reasonable doubt about the underlying liability, thereby rebutting statutory presumptions and warranting acquittal. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts