IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 AS.No. 73 of 2003() ---------------------------- OS.30/1996 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... APPELLANT(S): PLAINTIFF ----------------------- NARMADA CONSUMER STORES (P) LTD., KAUDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY DR.K.BALARAMAN, AGED 75 YEARS, RESIDING AT VALSA, KUMARAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, MANAGING DIRECTOR, NARMADA CONSUMER STORES (P) LTD., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.S.KALKURA RESPONDENT(S): DEFENDANT ------------------------ 1. SAKTHI ENTERPRISES, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (NAME OF THE 1ST DEFENDANT IS STRUCK OUT AS PER THE ORDER ON IA 924/98 DATED 24-2-98) 2. SRG SEKHAR, AGED 57, RESIDING AT T.C.25/1736, SREEMOOLAM ROAD, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. T.SUBASH CHANDRAN, AGED 30, V.P.238A, CHEENIKONAM, MANIKANANTESWARAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. S.KAMALAM, AGED 52, T.C.25/1736, SREEMOOLAM ROAD, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R3 BY ADVS.SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH R2 & R4 BY SRI.GOPAKUMAR R.THALIYAL THIS APPEAL SUITS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON CMP. NO.1560/2003 IN AS. NO.73/2003 DISMISSED 13/07/2010 SD/- M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = A.S. NO. 73 OF 2003 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 13th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T When the matter was taken up for hearing the learned counsel for the appellant in all fairness submitted before me that on the very same dishonoured cheque prosecution was initiated u/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as C.C.102/96 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate(Mobile), Thiruvananthapuram wherein the accused was found guilty and he was directed to pay compensation. It is also submitted that the said finding attained finality by the judgment of the revisional Court and the amount due to the plaintiff had been realised by virtue of the said proceeding. So in the light of the said fact there cannot be unjust enrichment and duplication A.S. 73 OF 2003 -2- of payment on the very same cause of action. Therefore the appeal is closed on the ground that the said claim is satisfied by the proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act case. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/- A.S. 73 OF 2003 -3- M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = A.S. No. 73 OF 2003 = = = = = = = = = = = J U D G M E N T 13th July, 2010.