9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Dismissal of complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, restoration of complaint, maintainability of application for restoration, non-appearance of petitioner, proclaimed offender status, sufficiency of reasons for non-appearance.
Issue 1: Dismissal of Complaint and Restoration The petitioner filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which was dismissed in default. Subsequently, the application for restoration of the complaint was also dismissed as not maintainable. The challenge was made to these orders, and the Additional Sessions Judge upheld the dismissal. The petitioner argued for restoration under Section 482 of the Code, citing a previous case for reference. Issue 2: Proclaimed Offender Status and Non-Appearance The respondent was declared a proclaimed offender, and efforts to serve him were unsuccessful. The petitioner's non-appearance on one date led to the dismissal of the complaint. The petitioner contended that the dismissal was unjust considering the circumstances, including the respondent's evasion of service and the difficulty in locating his property. Judgment: The High Court found that the petitioner's non-appearance was not intentional and set aside the order dismissing the complaint. The complaint was restored, and the petitioner was directed to appear for further proceedings. The Court emphasized that justice should not be dispensed blindly and noted the challenges faced by the petitioner in serving the respondent. Ultimately, the petitions were allowed, and the complaint was reinstated.
|
