B.Praveena vs K.Padma on 10 April, 2026

    0
    33
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Madras High Court

    B.Praveena vs K.Padma on 10 April, 2026

    Author: M.Nirmal Kumar

    Bench: M. Nirmal Kumar

                                                                                  Crl.M.P.No.6625 of 2026
                                                                                            in
                                                                                  CRL OP No. 9367 of 2026
    
                                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
                                                       DATED: 10-04-2026
                                                            CORAM
                                THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR
                                                    Crl.M.P.No.6625 of 2026
                                                              in
                                                    CRL OP No. 9367 of 2026
    
                    B.Praveena
                    Proprietor,
                    Pranesh Associates,
                    No.701, 7th Floor, Q-Tower (Black),
                    Metro Zone (Backside V.R.Mall),
                    Anna Nagar, Koyambedu,
                    Chennai 600 040.
                                                                            Petitioner(s)
                                                               Vs
                    K.Padma
                                                                            Respondent(s)
    
    
                                      For Petitioner(s):   Mr.T.P.Manoharan
                                                           Senior Counsel
                                                           for Mr.T.M.Naveen
    
                                                            ORDER
    

    The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the

    respondent has lodged a false complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable

    SPONSORED

    Instruments Act, 1881 against the petitioner beyond the period of limitation,

    that too, without filing any petition for condonation of delay. Further, he

    submitted that the cheque was issued in connection with the earlier transactions,

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
    Crl.M.P.No.6625 of 2026
    in
    CRL OP No. 9367 of 2026

    for which the entire amount has been repaid is misused.

    2. It was further submitted that a police complaint was lodged stating that

    the petitioner owes dues to the respondent. The respondent police, upon enquiry,

    found that the complaint to be false and closed the same.

    3. In view of the above, this Court finds force in the submission made by

    the learned counsel for the petitioner. Accordingly, there shall be an order of

    interim stay.

    Post this matter on 09.06.2026.

    10-04-2026
    Jd
    Index:Yes/No
    Speaking/Non-speaking order
    Internet:Yes
    Neutral Citation:Yes/No

    To

    1. FTC-I Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Allikulam, Chennai.

    2. The Public Prosecutor,
    Madras High Court, Chennai.

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
    Crl.M.P.No.6625 of 2026
    in
    CRL OP No. 9367 of 2026

    M.NIRMAL KUMAR J.

    jd

    Crl.M.P.No.6625 of 2026
    in
    CRL OP No. 9367 of 2026

    10-04-2026

    https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here