JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt (Paul), J.

1. The present revision has been preferred against an impugned order passed by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court, Kolkata on 30.09.2019, in Case No. C-81565/18 under Section 143A of the Negotiable Instrument Act.

2. The petitioners’ case is that the petitioner took loan to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees Five Lac only) from the opposite party for purchasing a Mahindra Varito Car bearing No. WB 12C/3442 at a price of Rs.7,24,000/-on making down payment of Rs.2,50,000/-including the registration charges. While taking such loan the petitioner had to enter into a hire purchase agreement with the opposite party for repaying the said loan amount including interest in 36 installments @ Rs.17,800/-per month. In terms of the said agreement, containing an arbitration clause, the petitioner was liable to pay Rs.5,00,000/-principal amount and interest of Rs.1,40,800/-totalling Rs.6,40,800/- in 36 monthly equal installments meaning thereby Rs.17,800/-x 36 = Rs.6,40,800/-

3. It is stated that in terms of the said agreement the petitioner already paid 16 installments @ 17,800/-i.e. Rs.2,84,800/-and the balance amount of Rs.3,56,000/-is payable to liquidate the entire dues under the agreement.

4. At the time of taking loan to the tune of Rs.5,00,000/-the opposite party took 16 blank signed undated blank cheques from the petitioner, drawn on State Bank of India, Udaynarayanpur Branch, bearing cheque nos. 032693 to 032700, against account no. 20133015268 and cheque no. 121813 to 121820 drawn on the same bank in order to keep such cheques as a security measures till the loan amount is paid off under the agreement. The said car remained hypothecated to the opposite party being the financier mentioned in the R/C Book of the vehicle.

5. It is alleged that the opposite party purportedly in violations of the terms of the agreement has presented one blank signed cheque to the bank by putting the date 27.07.2018 in cheque no. 032700 amounting to Rs.4,00,000/-(Rupees four lakhs) in order to take advantage under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument (N.I.) Act for encashment by abusing the process of law but the fact remains that the petitioner has not given such cheque for payment of the dues of Rs.4,00,000/-as claimed under the agreement towards installments of the vehicle.

6. It is submitted that in a proceeding initiated by the opposite party under Section 138 of the N.I. Act the petitioner has entered appearance and contested the case. During pendency of the said case the opposite party filed an application under Section 143A of the N.I. Act praying for interim compensation. The said application was taken up for hearing by the Learned Magistrate on 30.09.2019. On that date the petitioner had engaged Learned Advocate Mr. Subrata Bhattacharya to conduct the case on his behalf. The learned Advocate of the petitioner sought for short time to get an instruction from his client to do the case properly for the sake of justice. Despite making such application, the Learned Magistrate did not grant any time and proceeded to hear the case accordingly.

7. The Learned Magistrate then passed an order on 30.09.2019 on the application filed by the opposite party under Section 143A of the N.I. Act for payment of interim compensation without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the Learned Counsel of the petitioner. The Learned Magistrate by order dated 30.09.2019 has been pleased to pass direction after hearing the Learned Counsel of the opposite party/complainant and keeping in mind the spirit of Section 143A of the N.I. Act and the intention of the legislature behind implementation of the said section that it would be just and proper if the accused/petitioner is directed to pay an interim compensation of Rs.80,000/-to the opposite party within 60 days from the date of this order. It was also directed that if the accused is acquitted from the case then the complainant/opposite party will be liable to repay the amount of