Allowed

Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories v. Rakesh Arora

Delhi HC8 Jan 2016CRL.L.P./174/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court Delhi allowed the criminal leave petition and the subsequent criminal appeal. The Court disposed of an appeal against the dismissal of a Section 138 NI Act complaint and remanded the matter to the Metropolitan Magistrate for trial on merits.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dismissing the complaint was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Metropolitan Magistrate for trial on merits.

Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories Vs Rakesh Arora — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2016)

¶1

$~13

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.L.P. 174/2014

¶4

HAMDARAD (WAKAF) LABORATORIES ..... Petitioner Through Mr. Ravi Sikri, Mr. Sumel Khanna and Mr. Deeponk Yadav, Advocates

¶5

versus

¶6

RAKESH ARORA ..... Respondent Through Mr. Rohit Gandhi, Advocate

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SIDDHARTH MRIDUL

¶8

O R D E R % 08.01.2016

¶9

Having heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, the Court is of the view that there are sufficient grounds for grant of leave to appeal. Accordingly, the criminal leave petition is allowed.

¶10

The matter is directed to be registered as a criminal appeal.

¶11

CRL.A._________/2016 (To be numbered)

¶12

After hearing learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties, the present appeal is being disposed of by this order.

¶13

The present appeal assails the order dated 12^th December, 2013 passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, Negotiable Instruments Act, (West), Delhi, dismissing the complaint being Criminal Complaint Case No. 2174/1 filed on behalf of the appellant under Section 138 of the NI Act, on account of the circumstance that the appellant was unable to serve the respondent herein despite repeated opportunities.

¶14

As is evident from a perusal of the order impugned in the present appeal, the complaint filed on behalf of the appellant had not been heard or adjudicated on merits. In my considered view, an opportunity must be granted to the

¶15

complainant to prosecute the complaint before the concerned Magistrate especially in view of the circumstance that the respondent has now appeared before this Court.

¶16

The present appeal is consequently allowed.

¶17

The impugned order dated 12^th December, 2013 is set aside.

¶18

The Criminal Complaint Case No. 2174/1 filed under Section 138 of the NI Act titled Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories vs. Rakesh Arora is remanded back to the Court of the concerned Magistrate for adjudication on merits, subject to payment of Rs. 10,000/- as costs to be paid to the respondent within a period of two weeks from today.

¶19

List the matter before the concerned Magistrate on 2^nd March, 2016 for hearing and adjudication of the complaint case as afore-stated on merits in accordance with law.

¶20

SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J

¶21

JANUARY 08, 2016 sd

Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories v. Rakesh Arora

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hamdarad (Wakaf) Laboratories v. Rakesh Arora

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

NCT of Delhi Vs Anil Nayyar

Raksha Jindal Vs State ( Govt of NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Rajawati Vs State

Gyan Chand @ Kallu Vs State

Bhudev Pal Vs State

Mohd Dilshad & Ors. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.