IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3354/2007 [Premjeetsingh Manmohansingh Oberai vs. Girdharisingh Gbangaramsingh Bisen and another] - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------------------------------------------------- - -- CORAM : S.R.DONGAONKAR, J. DATE : 1 st JULY, 2009 Heard Shri Sarda, Advocate, for the applicant and Shri Joshi, Advocate, for respondent no.1. None present for respondent no.2. This is an application for grant of leave to file appeal against respondent no.1 for the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. It may be mentioned that the complaint was filed by the applicant for the offence under Section 138 of N.I.Act in the Court of J.M.F.C. vide SCC No.13049/2005. After hearing at the trial, the learned trial Judge acquitted respondent no.1 vide judgment & order dated 01/09/2007. The main aspect of the case is that, according to the applicant, loan was advanced to respondent no.1 personally. However, it seems that the cheque was issued in the name of Swami Auto Dealing, which is alleged to be the proprietorship concern of the applicant/complainant. There is nothing in the affidavit to show that there was any transaction between Swami Auto Deal & respondent no.1 and therefore, respondent no.1 has issued chque in its name. The transaction between the applicant/complainant in respect of respondent no.1 can not be a matter for issue of cheque in the name of proprietor concerned through Swami Auto Deal to invite the liability under Section 138 of N.I.Act, if such cheque is dishonoured, as the consideration needs to be valid consideration infavour of the person in whose favour the cheque is issued. In this view of the matter, the findings of the trial Court can not be said to be incorrect so as to allow the application to file appeal against respondent no.1. As such, application for leave to file appeal as well as appeal are dismissed. JUDGE Rvjalit