IN THE COURT OF _______________- COURT, DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF:-
XY VS. Xx
U/S 138 N.I ACT
APPLICATION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT / Accused U/S 145 (2) N.T ACT
MOST RESPECT FULLY Showerhead :-
That the above noted complaint is pending trial before the Hon’ble court and the same is now fixed for ____________
- That the applicant / accused has no transaction with the complainant at any point of time and the cheque in question had been misused by the complainant.
- That the applicant/ accused and his business partner AB made deal with the complainant for goods and had paid has amounted to him on the same date whenever they buy goods from the complainant.
- That the applicant/ accused met the complainant through his business partner earlier and now applicant / accused business partner had left the business with the accused and now all the liability is headed on the head of the accused/ applicant.
- The said cheque of RS _________was taken by the complainant before giving goods to applicant/ accused as surety as he said he will send the material and goods right now, but later on the complainant did not send any goods to applicant / accused and misused the cheque.
- The applicant/ accused is held liable for said amount alone, but his partner was also the part of it and complainant himself said to the accused that this amount was liable to your business partner (AB) and without any mistake you become part of it.
- Complainant had taken the said amount by fraud and later he himself bounce the cheque and accused/ applicant had not made any mistake. In proof as recording complainant himself had said words “mera toh kaam hi hai cheque bounce krwana aur fasana”
- So there is no friendly loan of amount _________with accused / applicant and the complainant had taken the amount by fraud and he misused the cheque later on for his own purpose and now he is claiming for same without reasons.
- That the cheque in question has been misused by the complaint as applicant /accused gave the cheque as surety to buy goods which was never given by the complainant and within two years there is no business held between the applicant /accused and the complainant .
- That’s an opportunity should be given to applicant/ accused for the cross examination of the complainant to prove himself so that the real truth of complainant could come out. And if the application of the accused / applicant is not allowed the applicant / accused will suffer irreparable loss.
It is, therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed that the application u/s 145 (2) of N.I Act may kindly be allowed in favor of the applicant / accused and against the complainant and the applicant / accused be allowed to cross examine the complainant as per the submission made above and in interest of justice.