Dismissed¶¶16

M/S Jangid Constructuion and Ors. v. Indiabuils Investment Advisior Ltd.

Delhi HC8 Apr 2025CRL.M.C./1596/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Section 362 Cr.P.C. deals with judgment and final order disposing of a case; it does not deal with changes sought in the answer to notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. ¶¶14

M/S Jangid Constructuion and Ors. Vs Indiabuils Investment… — Cheque Dishonour | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~86

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

CRL.M.C. 1596/2025 & CRL.M.A. 7254/2025 (stay) M/S JANGID CONSTRUCTUION AND ORS. .....Petitioners Through: Mr. Mohan Babu Agarwal, Advocate

¶4

versus

¶5

INDIABUILS INVESTMENT ADVISIOR LTD. .....Respondent Through: None.

¶6

CORAM:

¶7

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 08.04.2025

¶10

[ Physical Hearing/Hybrid Hearing (as per request)]

¶11

The petitioner has sought quashing of order dated 18.01.2025 of the learned Trial Magistrate in proceedings under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears that while framing notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C., the question put was as to whether the demand notice bore correct address of the petitioner/accused and whether he received the demand notice. In response, the petitioner stated that the demand notice bore correct address but he did not receive the notice. After more than one year of framing the notice, the petitioner/accused filed an application seeking to rectify the answer and state that the demand notice did not bear correct address. That application was rejected by way of the impugned order.

¶12

Learned counsel for petitioners contends that under Section 362 Cr.P.C., the learned Trial Magistrate had power to carry out correction in the answer to the notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. I find no substance in this argument. The provision under Section 362 Cr.P.C. deals with judgment and

¶13

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2025 at 14:28:08

¶14

final order disposing of a case. It does not deal with the changes sought in the answer to notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C.

¶15

Further, as correctly observed by the learned Trial Magistrate in the impugned order, having slept over the issue for more than one year, the petitioner cannot be allowed to raise the issue now. That too, since the answer to the notice under Section 251 Cr.P.C. is a crucial answer. It appears that petitioner is trying to retract the admission as regards address mentioned on the demand notice.

¶16

I am unable to find any merit in the petition. Therefore, the petition is dismissed with costs of Rs. 10,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the DHCLSC within one week. For compliance as regards costs, copy of this order be sent to the Trial Magistrate.

¶17

GIRISH KATHPALIA, J

¶18

APRIL 8, 2025/ rk

¶19

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

¶20

This is a digitally signed order.

¶21

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2025 at 14:28:08

M/S Jangid Constructuion and Ors. v. Indiabuils Investment Advisior Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Jangid Constructuion and Ors. v. Indiabuils Investment Advisior Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deepak Verma Vs the Govt of NCT of Delhi

Vivek Narayan Vs State of Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Vinay Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi

Sunil Nayak Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Mohd. Shahid Jamal Vs the State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Devender Kumar @ Aniket Vs State through SHO Ps Prem Nagar