Allowed

Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd. v. Suresh Kumar

Kerala HC16 Nov 2021CRL.A/206/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a criminal appeal against the dismissal of a cheque dishonour complaint under Section 138 NI Act. The Court set aside the impugned order dismissing the complaint due to the appellant's non-appearance on account of a mishap and directed the Magistrate to restore the file and decide it on merits.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 15.12.2014 is set aside; the complaint is restored to the Magistrate's file to be considered on merits; parties directed to appear on 14.12.2021.

Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd. Vs Suresh Kumar — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.A.No.206/2015

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 25TH KARTHIKA, 1943

¶7

CRL.A NO. 206 OF 2015

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ST 480/2012 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS -I, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA

¶9

APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

¶10

SREE GOKULAM CHIT & FINANCE CO.(P) LTD., SREE GOKULAM TOWERS, NO.66, ARCOT ROAD, CHENNAI -24, HAVING ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT CHERTHALA AT GANDHI BAZAR SHOPPING COMPLEX, CANAL ROAD, CHERTHALA, REP. BY ITS ASSISTANT BUSINESS MANAGER & POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, K.MOHANAN, S/O.KUMARAN, AGED 50 YEARS, KANNUKULANGARA, S.N.PURAM P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA - 688 582.

¶11

BY ADV SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN

¶12

RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED & STATE:

¶13

1 SURESH KUMAR, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN, THACHAKKAL, THANNERMUKKAM P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA - 688 527.

¶14

2 STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KEALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

BY ADV SMT.R.SUDHA

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Crl.A.No.206/2015

JUDGMENT

Appellant is the complainant in S.T.No.480 of 2012 on the file of the Court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Cherthala. The petitioner is aggrieved by the dismissal of the complaint under Section 256(1) of Cr.P.C. as per order dated 15.12.2014 by the learned Magistrate.

¶21

Aforesaid complaint was submitted by the petitioner alleging offence against the 1^st respondent herein under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. The case of the appellant is that a cheque issued by the 1^st respondent for an amount of Rs.79,269/- (Rupees seventy nine thousand two hundred and sixty nine only) was dishonoured for want of sufficient funds when presented before the bank for encashment. Even though statutory notice was sent, the 1^st respondent neither paid the amount or nor send any reply. The complaint was submitted in the above circumstances. When the complaint came up for consideration before learned Magistrate on 15.12.2014, as the appellant could not be present, the complaint was dismissed. The learned counsel for the appellant contends that, on the date

¶22

Crl.A.No.206/2015

¶23

¶24

when the case was posted, the Power of Attorney holder of the appellant company could not appear before the Court, as the house warming ceremony of the Power of Attorney holder was scheduled on the same day. The learned counsel for the appellant brought my attention to Annexure-A1 produced along with the appeal memorandum, which is the invitation letter for the same.

¶25

The learned counsel further submits that the appellant was properly prosecuting the matter but only on one occasion the Power of Attorney holder could not be present and so the appellant seeks for an opportunity to decide the matter on merits.

¶26

It is evident that the dismissal of the complaint was solely due to the non-appearance of the appellant. It is always desirable that the dispute between the parties to the litigation is decided on merits rather than dismissing the complaint on technical grounds. In this case, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that an opportunity can be granted to the appellant for prosecuting the matter. The reasons highlighted by the appellant for non-appearance on that

¶27

Crl.A.No.206/2015 4

¶28

particular day appears to be reasonable. In such circumstances, the order dated 15.12.2014 in S.T.No.480 of 2012 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Cherthala is hereby set aside and the learned Magistrate is directed to restore the complaint in the file and consider the complaint on merits. Criminal Appeal is allowed with the above findings and directions.

¶29

Parties are directed to appear before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Cherthala on 14.12.2021.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. JUDGE

DG/16.11.21

Crl.A.No.206/2015 5

Crl.A.No.206/2015

APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 206/2015

¶37

PETITIONER ANNEXURE:

¶38

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE INVITATION LETTER FOR THE HOUSE WARMING CEREMONY.

Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd. v. Suresh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sree Gokulam Chit & Finance Co. (P) Ltd. v. Suresh Kumar

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

Praveen Vs State of Kerala

P.C.Achankunju Vs the State of Kerala

Victim Vs State of Kerala

Dr.C. Gangadharan Nambiar Vs State of Kerala

P.G.Koshy Panicker Vs State of Kerala

Sreekanth Vs State of Kerala