Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 165 views

    In The Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Lpu, Jalandhar

    Uploaded by

    Tia Khanna
    1. Ms. Mita Wadhwa is being accused by Ms. Sarita Varman of not repaying a loan of Rs. 2,90,000. 2. In her affidavit, Ms. Wadhwa denies ever receiving any loan from Ms. Varman and claims the documents and blank cheque she signed were only to help Ms. Varman secure a loan, not for Ms. Wadhwa to receive a loan. 3. Ms. Wadhwa provides documents to support that she was not in town on the date the legal notice was allegedly served and that her bank statements do not show a repayment of Rs. 2,00,000 that Ms. Varman claims was made.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    In The Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Lpu, Jalandhar

    Uploaded by

    Tia Khanna
    165 views3 pages
    1. Ms. Mita Wadhwa is being accused by Ms. Sarita Varman of not repaying a loan of Rs. 2,90,000. 2. In her affidavit, Ms. Wadhwa denies ever receiving any loan from Ms. Varman and claims the documents and blank cheque she signed were only to help Ms. Varman secure a loan, not for Ms. Wadhwa to receive a loan. 3. Ms. Wadhwa provides documents to support that she was not in town on the date the legal notice was allegedly served and that her bank statements do not show a repayment of Rs. 2,00,000 that Ms. Varman claims was made.

    Original Description:

    evidence

    Original Title

    Evidence Affidavit

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. Ms. Mita Wadhwa is being accused by Ms. Sarita Varman of not repaying a loan of Rs. 2,90,000. 2. In her affidavit, Ms. Wadhwa denies ever receiving any loan from Ms. Varman and claims the documents and blank cheque she signed were only to help Ms. Varman secure a loan, not for Ms. Wadhwa to receive a loan. 3. Ms. Wadhwa provides documents to support that she was not in town on the date the legal notice was allegedly served and that her bank statements do not show a repayment of Rs. 2,00,000 that Ms. Varman claims was made.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    165 views3 pages

    In The Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Lpu, Jalandhar

    Uploaded by

    Tia Khanna
    1. Ms. Mita Wadhwa is being accused by Ms. Sarita Varman of not repaying a loan of Rs. 2,90,000. 2. In her affidavit, Ms. Wadhwa denies ever receiving any loan from Ms. Varman and claims the documents and blank cheque she signed were only to help Ms. Varman secure a loan, not for Ms. Wadhwa to receive a loan. 3. Ms. Wadhwa provides documents to support that she was not in town on the date the legal notice was allegedly served and that her bank statements do not show a repayment of Rs. 2,00,000 that Ms. Varman claims was made.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 3

    IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN

    MAGISTRATE AT LPU, JALANDHAR


    PCR NO. /2018
    IN
    CC NO. /2018

    BETWEEN
    Ms. Sarita Varman aged 30 years
    W/O Mr. Vineet Varman
    #123, Ashok Vihar,
    Jalandhar ….……..Complainant
    AND
    Ms Mita Wadhwa aged 31 years
    W/O Mr. Abhishek Wadhwa
    #20, New Model Town,
    Jalandhar …..…………Accused

    EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT FOR AND ON BEHALF OF THE ACCUSED

    I, Ms Mita Wadhwa aged about 31 years, W/O Mr. Abhishek Wadhwa, do hereby solemnly
    affirm and declare as under:
    1. That I approached the complainant for financial help and the complainant promised me
    that she will provide me loan through third person who is known to her in the bank.
    2. That the complainant asked me to sign some blank documents and issue a blank cheque
    as a surety. But the loan was never granted.
    3. That I have never received loan of any kind from the complainant.
    4. That the complainant states that she had given cash loan on 16-1-2017 of Rs 2,90,000 but
    no such amount was received by me.
    5. That I have not paid any amount of Rs 2,00,000 on 12-7-2017 as repayment of debt as I
    have never received any loan from the complainant and bank statement for same month
    has been attached under Annexure A.
    6. That the complainant states that she had demanded money through legal notice on
    30/9/2017 and cheque bearing no. 592102 of Yes Bank with my signature and payee
    name (that is Sarita) was given as security to her on that very day but no such demand
    notice was received by me and the cheque mentioned above was a blank cheque given by
    me on 16-1-2017 with my signature on it.
    7. That I was out of station on 30/9/17 for some business purpose and the bus ticket from
    Jalandhar to Delhi is marked as Annexure B.
    8. That the alleged cheque given by me was presented by the complainant on 21-12-2017
    and same was dishonored with reason to be “FUNDS INSUFFICIENT”.
    9. That the purpose of the cheque alleged in this case was to be used as a medium to get a
    loan from the bank by the help of the complainant but was wrongly used by the
    complainant to gain personal benefits.
    10. That I am innocent and have not committed any offence as alleged by the complainant.
    11. That the amount transacted by cheque is not a legally enforceable debt and hence, as
    such, would not attract the penal provision under section 138 of Negotiable Instrument
    Act. Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act attracts strict liablility of penal nature
    only. Strict liability of 138 can be enforced only when it is a case of discharge of a legally
    enforceable debt or liability.

    ACCUSED

    VERIFICATION
    Verified at Jalandhar on 12th day of April, 2018 that the content of the above affidavit are true
    and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief based on the records maintained by the
    institute in normal course of business. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
    concealed there from.

    ACCUSED
    PRAYER
    Wherefore, it is prayed that the Honorable Court be pleased to accept these evidence presented
    by the way of affidavit.

    Jalandhar

    Date: Accused

    You might also like