Allowed

M/S Bharat Building v. M/S Santosh Associates and Anr.

Punjab & Haryana HC7 Nov 2012CRM-A/538/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a criminal appeal against the dismissal of a cheque complaint in default, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal order, and remanded the case for further proceedings on merits after fixing a date for costs.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order dated 12.3.2011 set aside; appeal allowed subject to payment of Rs. 5,000; parties directed to appear on 10.12.2012.

M/S Bharat Building Vs M/S Santosh… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

-1-

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. A-538-MA of 2011

¶3

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh

¶4

Crl. Appeal No. A-538-MA of 2011 (O&M) Date of Decision: 07.11.2012.

¶5

M/s Bharat Building Material Supplier .......Applicant-Appellant & Transport Contractor

¶6

Versus

¶7

M/s Santosh Associates Pvt. Ltd. and another .......Respondents

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶9

Present: Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the applicant-appellant.

¶10

Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for the respondents. ****

¶11

SABINA, J.

¶12

Heard.

¶13

Leave to appeal is granted.

¶14

Registry is directed to number the appeal.

¶15

Main case

¶16

This appeal has been filed against the order dated 12.3.2011 whereby the complaint filed by the appellant was dismissed in default and, consequently, respondents were acquitted of the charges framed against them.

¶17

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion that the instant appeal deserves to be allowed.

¶18

The impugned order dated 12.3.2011 reads as under:- “Today the case was fixed for Dws. Case has been called several times since morning but neither the complainant nor his counsel has come present. It is already 2.00 P.M. Further wait is not justified. It seems that complainant is negligently absent. So in these circumstances, present

¶19

-2-

¶20

Crl. Misc. No. A-538-MA of 2011

¶21

complaint is hereby dismissed in default. Accused is acquitted his bail bonds stands canceled and surety bonds stands discharged. File be consigned to the record room after due compliance.”

¶22

Thus, on 12.3.2011, the case was listed for defence evidence of the respondents. The appellant had already concluded his evidence. The trial Court had the option to decide the case on merits as the evidence in support of his complaint had also been led by the appellant. However, the trial court proceeded to dismiss the complaint in default.

¶23

Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant had been appearing on the earlier dates but due to inadvertence could not appeare before the trial Court on 12.3.2011. In case this appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside, the complaint filed by the appellant would be disposed of on merits. Appellant has also examined his witnesses and rather now the case is listed for defence evidence of the respondents.

¶24

Keeping in view the interest of justice, this appeal is allowed subject to payment of ` 5,000/- as costs. The impugned order dated 12.3.2011 is set aside. Parties are directed to appear before the trial court on 10.12.2012. The appellant is directed to pay the cost on the said date and thereafter, the trial Court shall proceed further with the complaint case, in accordance with law.

¶25

(SABINA) JUDGE

¶26

November 07, 2012 Gurpreet

M/S Bharat Building v. M/S Santosh Associates and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Bharat Building v. M/S Santosh Associates and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Pawan and Ors. Vs State of Haryana

Mulakh Raj Vs State of Haryana

Darbari Lal Vs State of Punjab etc.

Gurdev Singh Bhullar Vs State of Punjab

Gurdev Singh Bhullar Vs State of Punjab

Gurdev Singh Bhullar Vs State of Punjab