NOTICE

18/08/2008

FROM,

Adv. K G Sijo

Address: #9, Rose Street, Bengaluru

TO,

Adv. Rejo PN

Address: #3, Kailasa Street, Chennai

Ph: 798727209409234

Subject: Legal Notice u/s 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Under the instructions of the client and authority vested to us by him, we serve you the
following notice. The subject matter of the issue is as follows:

1. The Grandfather of the Complainant named Sri. H.V. Venkatappa Reddy had 5
children out of whom Ms. Padmavathy was one. Smt. Padmavathy married Sri.
Jayarama Reddy and they had two children, one of whom is the complainant in the
present dispute.
2. After the passing away of the parents, Complainant became part of the joint family of
Sri. H.V. Vekatappa Reddy. Hence, the complainant asked for her share in the
combined family party and also asked for a partition of the property.
3. On non effectuation of the partition, the complainant filed a suit for partition which
was compromised. The compromise fixed the share of the complainant which is
tabulated as follows:
a. 6 sites measuring 40*60 Feet in the ancestral property
b. An amount of 30 lakhs paid in the following tranches:
 Amount Method of Payment
Rs. 5,00,000/- Cheque
Rs. 5,00,000/- Cheque
Rs. 20,00,000/- Cheque
4. The Cheques have been submitted at the concerned bank and have been dishonoured
thereby prompting notice.
5. Owing to the above-mentioned circumstances, we call upon you to repay the total
amount within a total of 15 days from receipt of this notice along with Rupees 5000
towards legal services.
6. Failing to repay the total sum of Rs. 30,05000/- (Thirty Lakhs and fifty thousand)
within the aforementioned period would lead to us filing a complaint and initiating
proceedings under Sec 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in the appropriate court.
The costs of such action would be payable by you.

Yours Faithfully,

Adv. K G Sijo

Address: #9, Rose Street, Bengaluru

 REPLY TO NOTICE

FROM,

Adv. Rejo PN

Address: #3, Kailasa Street, Bengaluru

Ph: 798727209409234

DATE: 22/08/2008

TO,

Adv. K G Sijo

Address: #9, Rose Street, Bengaluru

Subject: Reply To Notice u/s 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881

Dear sir,

By the instructions of my client, I am serving you the reply to your notice dated:

1. At the very outset, we would like to draw your attention to the fact that Smt.
Manimala has no right over the property and that she was not the recipient of the
cheques nor do the concern the subject matter mentioned in the notice.
2. The statements in paragraph 1 and 2 of the notice are accepted however paragraph 3 is
disputed by us. The suit was withdrawn by Smt. Manimala and no compromise decree
was entered into.
3. Sri. Satish Kumar had bought the properties from other vendors for the purpose of
building a resort.
4. The Cheques said to be dishonored by the complainant were not meant for her but for
Sri. Venkatappa Reddy.
 5. Furthermore, neither Sri. Satish Kumar’s Grandfather or any other relative promised
Smt. Manimala any right to the cheque or the property.
6. Pursuant to the same, it is seen that the complainant is not liable to be paid the amount
stated in the cheque which is necessary for a complaint under Sec.138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act.
7. Hence, we advise you to withdraw your notice.

Yours Sincerely,

Adv. Rejo PN

Address: #3, Kailasa Street, Chennai