9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1018X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e respondent. 2. Petitioner had filed a complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 inter alia contending that the cheque issued by the respondent had got dishonoured for insufficient funds. 3. The Trial Court, by order dated 05.01.2015, had convicted the respondent and by order dated 13.01.2015 had sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs. 1,50,000/-. 4. The Appellate Court, in the impugned judgment dated 27.01.2016, noticed the fact that the petitioner had issued a legal notice of demand dated 07.01.2013 consequent to dishonour of the cheque on 27.12.2012. It was contended in the complaint that the respondent thereafter approached the petitioner and asked him to represent the cheque, which was represented but was once again di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nciple on which such failure to prosecute on the basis of the first default in payment should result in forfeiture, we find it difficult to hold that the payee would lose his right to institute such proceedings on a subsequent default that satisfies all the three requirements of Section 138. ***** ***** ***** 31. Applying the above rule of interpretation and the provisions of Section 138, we have no hesitation in holding that a prosecution based on a second or successive default in payment of the cheque amount should not be impermissible simply because no prosecution based on the first default which was followed by a statutory notice and a failure to pay had not been launched. If the entire purpose unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eque can initiate proceeding of prosecution under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 for the second time if he has not initiated any action on earlier cause of action?" by holding that a prosecution based on a second or successive default in payment of the cheque amount would not be impermissible simply because no prosecution based on the first default, which was followed by a statutory notice and a failure to pay, had been launched. 8. In view of the law, as laid down by the larger Bench of the Supreme Court, the impugned order, allowing the appeal of the respondent and dismissing the complaint of the petitioner solely on the ground of limitation calculated from the first notice of default, is not sustainable. 9. A complainan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
