2014 (1) TMI 1907 - HC - Indian Laws

Dishonor of Cheque - wrong cheque number has been narrated in the complaint - right to make amendments in typographical errors in the details of bounced cheque - HELD THAT - There is no dispute about the fact that wrong cheque number has been narrated in the complaint and affidavit in support of the same also contains same wrong cheque number but at the same time it is also true that impugned cheque, return memo from bank and notice which were presented along the complaint bear the cheque number which the present petitioner now wants to correct and the court below while taking cognizance should be vigilant that complaint and affidavit should contain the same cheque number which has been placed on record. In the present case, when complainant has been cross examined, the mistake came to the notice of complainant and application for the rectification has been moved and no person could be penalized for his bonafide mistake - Application allowed.

Summary

Issues: Setting aside an order denying amendments in details of a bounced cheque due to typographical errors.

The judgment pertains to a petition filed under Section 482 to challenge an order denying the right to make amendments in the details of a bounced cheque due to typographical errors. The petitioner argued that the mistake was bona fide, as the correct details were present on the impugned cheque, return memo from the bank, and notice accompanying the complaint. On the other hand, the respondent contended that the mistake was not bona fide, as the wrong cheque number was mentioned in the complaint and affidavit, leading to the denial of amendments by the lower court. The court noted the discrepancy in the complaint and affidavit but also acknowledged the correct cheque number on the impugned documents provided. The court considered previous case laws cited by both parties, emphasizing the distinction between cases where amendments were disallowed and the present situation where the petitioner sought to rectify a genuine mistake. Relying on legal precedents, the court concluded that the application for amendments should be allowed. Consequently, the petition was allowed, and the order of the lower court was set aside, granting the petitioner permission to rectify the details of the bounced cheque in the complaint and file a fresh supporting affidavit, subject to cross-examination by the respondent. The judgment disposed of the petition accordingly.