9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1916X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has registered the complaint without deciding the condonation application. Under the circumstances, a valuable right has accrued to the petitioner to defend his case on the ground of delay. The provisions of section 142(1)(b), Negotiable Instruments Act will have to be read in tandem with section 142(1)(a), Negotiable Instruments Act which starts with a non obstante clause that no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act except upon a complaint in writing made by the payee or as the case may be the holder in due course of the cheque. Section 142(1)(b) specifies that such complaint shall be made within one month of the date on which cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act. When there is a delay in filing the complaint, it is mandatory for the complainant to file an application for condonation of delay. When such application is filed, a notice will have to be issued to the accused before the order is passed either allowing the condonation application or declining the same. Reliance placed decision rendered by the Karnataka High Court in the case of Sajjan Kumar Jhunjh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 420 of the Indian Penal Code and 138, Negotiable Instruments Act. The substratum of the complaint is that the respondent has friendly relations with the petitioner. The petitioner asked him for a loan of seven lakh (seven hundred thousand) rupees for fulfilling his personal obligations. On 9-10-2009, he gave him seven lakh rupees in cash. On the same day, the petitioner handed over a written acknowledgment to him regarding the receiving of the amount, and he also gave him a post-dated cheque bearing date 10-11-2010, cheque No. 795891 (for short the cheque ), which is drawn by him on the UCO Bank Branch Sagar with which he is maintaining his bank account. He presented the cheque for encashment to the State Bank of India Branch Khurai with which he is maintaining his bank account. On 13-12-2010, the bank informed him that the petitioner's bank has dishonoured the cheque on account of insufficient fund in his bank account. On 27-12-2010, he sent him a demand notice at his residential address thus; Bibil Bhawan, Tili Road, Sagar by registered post with acknowledgment due. He unscrupulously managed the postman of the area. On account of which, he received the notice unserved with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , he has fixed the case for the complainant-respondent's evidence. In the meantime, the petitioner has filed this petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the respondent has filed the complaint with an application for condonation of delay, it is mandatory for the learned JMFC to give him an opportunity to oppose the condonation application. But the learned JMFC has registered the complaint against the petitioner straight way leaving the condonation application undecided. He submits that the respondent in the condonation application has not averred as to when the period of one month of filing the complaint expires as per provisions of section 142(1)(b), Negotiable Instruments Act. He submits that the respondent has also not averred in the condonation application how many days of delay the complaint suffers. Thus, the condonation application is very vague from the aforesaid aspect. He submits that the respondent has averred in the complaint and the condonation application that he had sent the last demand notice to the petitioner on 6-9-2011 and that he received the same with postal endorsement on 14-9-2011. He submits that the respondent has filed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Act. Under section 142(1)(b), Negotiable Instruments Act a complaint is required to be filed within one month from the date of which the cause of action has arisen as per clause (c) of the proviso to section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act. The proviso under sub-clause (b) of clause (1) of section 142 was added by Act No. 55/2 with effect from 6-2-2013 enabling the complainant to file the complaint after the prescribed period of limitation if he satisfies the Court that he had sufficient cause in not making the complaint within time prescribed. On a bare reading of the said proviso, it becomes abundantly clear that a time-barred complaint could also be entertained if the complainant satisfies the trial Court that he had a cause. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the learned JMFC has registered the complaint without deciding the condonation application. Under the circumstances, a valuable right has accrued to the petitioner to defend his case on the ground of delay. The provisions of section 142(1)(b), Negotiable Instruments Act will have to be read in tandem with section 142(1)(a), Negotiable Instruments Act which starts with a non obstante clause that no Court shall take cognizan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
