SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(Del) 750

NAVIN CHAWLA
Honey Verma – Appellant
Versus
Piyush Nautiyal – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
Mr.Deepak Kohli, Advocate, for the Petitioner.
None, for the Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Navin Chawla, J. (Oral) - This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, `Cr.P.C.'), praying for quashing of complaint filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short, `NI Act') in Complaint Case No.437/2019 titled Piyush Nautiyal v. Honey Verma, on the ground that the legal notice dated 06.01.2019 issued by the respondent prior to the filing of the complaint is not in terms of the proviso appended to Section 138 of the NI Act.

2. The Complaint has been filed by the respondent/complainant that a cheque bearing No. 684791, dated 02.12.2018 for Rs.2,00,000/- was drawn on the Punjab National Bank, which was returned unpaid. Thereafter, the respondent/complainant issued a legal notice dated 06.01.2019, as provided under Section 138(b) of the NI Act. As the petitioner did not pay the amount, the respondent filed the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act. Summons were issued to the petitioner on the Complaint vide order dated 01.02.2019.

3. In spite of service of notice of this petition, none is appearing for the respondent.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top