ORDER

Crl.A. @ SLP(Crl.) No(s).137/2019

1. Leave granted.

2. Despite successive notices served on the respondent, he has chosen not to appear. The last notice clearly mentioned that the matter will be finally disposed of at notice stage.

3. The present appeal takes exception to the order dated 15th November, 2018 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench, thereby it allowed the application filed by the respondent for quashing of proceedings instituted against him under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The sole argument of the respondent commended to the High Court was that a legal notice was not duly served on him within the statutory period.

4. After hearing counsel for the appellant, we have no manner of doubt that the reason commended to the High Court, is unacceptable. For, the fact that notice was duly served on the respondent or otherwise, is a triable issue; and cannot be proceeded as an indisputable position-as is expounded by this Court in ‘Ajeet Seeds Limited vs. K. Gopala Krishnaiah’ reported in (2014) 12 SCC 685.

5. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. Consequently, the complaint shall now pro