The cause of action under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act arises from the date of receipt of the notice, not the date of issuance.

GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition under Section 482 of the cr. P. C. , to quash the proceedings in CC no. 168 of 1998 on the file of the H Metropolitan magistrate, Visakhapatnam, registered for the alleged offence punishable under sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

( 2 ) THE averments in the petition are that the relationship between the complainant i. e. , the 1st respondent herein and the accused who is the petitioner herein is that of a landlord and tenant and in lieu of arrears of rent, the complainant issued a cheque bearing no. 0921121 dated 4-10-1997 for an amount 9frs. 28,000/-drawnonstatebankofpatiala, near Kotha Road, Visakhapatnam Branch. When it was presented on 24-10-1997, it was bounced with an endorsement dt. 25-10-1997 that there are no sufficient funds.

( 3 ) WHEN the cheque was presented again on 21-11-1997, it was again dishonored with the very same endorsement on 22-11-1997 and on that, a notice as contemplated under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments act was issued on 4-12-1997 but the same was returned unserved.

( 4 ) AGAIN on 31-1-1998, the respondent herein presented the cheque with the hope that it would be honoured and again it was dishonoured on 3-2-1998 with an endorsement "insufficient funds". Within a period of 15 days, a notice as contemplated under Section 138 of the Negotiable instruments Act was issued on 12-2-1998 and the same was acknowledge by the petitioner herein. Inspite of notice being received, the petitioner has not made any payment and the respondent has, therefore, chosen to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

( 5 ) SRI A. Sreedhar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, strenuously contended that the proceedings initiated against the petitioner are nothing but an abuse of process of the Court as it is barred by limitation in view of the fact that the first notice was sent on 4-12-1997, on which date the cause of action arose, and it should have been presented within the period mentioned in section 138 of the Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon a judgment reported in Sadanandan Bhadran v. Madhavan sunil Kumar\ wherein their Lordships have taken the view that when once a notice requesting the payment is made, cause of action starts from the date when the notice was received by the accused. The relevant paragraphs of the said judgments are as follows:"5. The next question that falls for our determination is whether dishonour of the cheque on each occasion of its presentation gives rise to a fresh cause of action within the meaning of Sec. l42 (b) of the Act. Section 142 reads as under: 142. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), (a) no Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Section 138 except upon a complaint, in writing, made by the payee or, as the case may be, the holder in due course of the cheque; (b) such complaint is made within one month of the date of which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 238; (c) no Court inferior to that of a metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial magistrate of the first class shall try any of fence punishable under Sec. 138. From a plain reading of the above section, it is manifest that a competent Court can take cognizance of a written complaint of an offence under Section 138 if it is made within one month of the date on which the cause of action arises under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138.

( 6 ) IN a generic and wide sense (as in sec. 20 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908) cause of action means every fact which it is necessary to establish to support a right or obtain a judgment. Viewed in that context, the following facts are required to be proved to successfully prosecute the drawer for an offence under section 138 of the Act. (A) that the cheque was drawn for payment of an amount of money for discharge of a debf /liability and the cheque was dishonoure

Click Here to Read the rest of this document