The central legal point established is that delay in filing a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act may be condoned based on substantial justice, especially in cases where the delay is due to circumstances beyond the control of the complainant.

I.S. MEHTA, J.

1. The instant petition is preferred by the petitioners under Article 227 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. for setting aside/quashing the impugned order dated 10.02.2014 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in CC. No. 258/1A/13 titled as M/s Dee Marks Hotel & Resorts vs. M/s Adriyana Eventide & Others, wherein the learned Metropolitan Magistrate allowed the application moved by the respondents/complainants for condonation of delay of 27 days in filing the complaint under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

2. The brief facts stated are that the petitioner no. 2 - Dhyanesh Raj is one of the partners of the petitioner No. 1/firm - M/s Adriyana Eventide who are engaged in the business of event management. As per the alleged allegations in the complaint under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on 12.01.2013 the petitioner No. 2 along with other partners of the petitioner No. 1/firm approached the respondent No. 1/complainant - M/s Dee Marks Hotel and Resorts which is a unit of the respondent No. 2- M/s Dalip Trading Pvt. Ltd. for arranging/booking a marriage party/dinner at the venue of the respondents/complainants for their client.

3. After the estimate for the venue and the function was finalized the petitioner No. 1 and the partners of the petitioner No. 2/firm gave a sum of Rs 25,000/- as advance to the respondent No. 1/complainant at the time of booking the party. On 28.01.2013 the petitioner No. 1 further gave a sum of Rs. 75,000/- to the respondent No. 1/complainant and assured that the total bill for the function will be cleared before the end of the marriage party.

4. Thereafter, on 30.04.2013 in part discharge of their liability the petitioner No. 1 issued a cheque bearing No. 444676 dated 30.04.2013 drawn on ICICI Bank, Greater Kailash II Branch, New Delhi for a sum of Rs. 1,86,000/- in favour of the respondent No. 1/complainant. On 14.06.2013 the respondent No. 1/complainant presented the said cheque to its banker but the same was returned unpaid vide return memo dated 14.06.2013 with remarks "Funds insufficient."

5. A legal notice dated 05.07.2013 was served upon to the petitioner No. 1, petitioner No. 2/firm and its other partners by the respondents/complainants thereby demanding the cheque amount with interest within 15 days of the receipt of the legal notice. The petitioners replied to the said legal notice of the respondents/complainants on 19.07.2013. Further, when the petitioners failed to make the cheque payment within 15 days notice period the respondents/complainants filed a complaint on 17.09.2013 under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 against the petitioners and the other partners of the firm in the Court of learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.

6. Further, the respondents/complainants had also moved an application for condonation of delay of 27 days in filing of the aforesaid complaint case under the NI Act.

7. Consequently, after perusal of the record and considering the submissions made by the learned counsels of the parties the learned Metropolitan Magistrate-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi vide impugned order dated 10.02.2014 in CC. No. 258/1A/13 allowed the aforesaid application for condonation of delay of the respondents/complainants subject to cost of Rs. 2500/-.

Hence the present petition.

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the learned Metropolitan Magistrate while allowing the application of the respondents/complainants for condonation of delay has not appreciated the fact that the cause disclosed by the AR for the respondents/complainants was not supported by any documents. Therefore the learned Metropolitan Magistrate in a mechanical manner and without application of mind has passed the impugned order dated 10.02.2014 which is ba