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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 12784

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
M/s. GRM Constructions – Appellant
Versus
M/s. Ganga Associates – Respondent



##PAGE1##

Crl.O.P.No.1590 of 2026

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 28.01.2026

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

Crl.O.P.No.1590 of 2026

M/s. GRM Constructions

Rep. by its Power Agent,

Mr.P.Ganesh Kumar (32 Years),

No.6/A, Salem Road,

Kalangani,

Namakkal - 637 014. ...Petitioner

Vs.

M/s. Ganga Associates

Rep.by its Proprietor,

Mr.S.Rajagopal,

S/o. Subramanian,

Having office at

No.143/40, Second Cross,

Ponnagar,

Tiruchirappalli - 620 001. ...Respondent

Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya

Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C., to set aside the docket order

dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II at

Namakkal and consequentially issue a direction to the learned Judicial

Magistrate No.II,Namakkal to number and take cognizance of the case in

STC.No. (Filing Number) 2954 of 2024 .

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Parthasarathy

1/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/02/2026 03:45:06 pm )

##PAGE2##

Crl.O.P.No.1590 of 2026

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to set aside

the docket order dated 01.07.2025 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate

No.II, Namakkal, returning the criminal complaint on the point of lack of

territorial jurisdiction and consequently to direct the learned Magistrate to

number the complaint and take cognizance of the same in STC.No. (Filing

Number) 2954 of 2024.

2. The case of the petitioner is that the respondent / accused

issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.10,88,660/- bearing cheque No.000043,

drawn on HDFC Bank, Kangeyam Road, Chennimalai, Erode. The said

cheque was presented by the petitioner for collection on 22.01.2024 through

Axis Bank, Gandhipuram Branch, Coimbatore. The cheque was returned on

23.01.2024. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a complaint before the Judicial

Magistrate No.I, Namakkal on 21.03.2024. The learned Judicial Magistrate

returned the complaint for want of territorial jurisdiction. Subsequently, the

petitioner filed a memo and re-presented the complaint on 26.06.2025.

Whereas, the learned Magistrate, vide docket order dated 01.07.2025 once

again returned the complaint with the following endorsement:

“No Territorial Jurisdiction.

On the point of jurisdiction this petition to be file proper

2/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/02/2026 03:45:06 pm )

##PAGE3##

Crl.O.P.No.1590 of 2026

form.

Hence returned”

Challenging the said docket order dated 01.07.2025, this petition has been

filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

though the cheque was presented for collection through Axis Bank,

Gandhipuram Branch, Coimbatore, the petitioner maintains his account with

Axis Bank, Bothupatti Branch, Namakkal, which falls within the territorial

jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal. He would further

submit that as per the mandate of Section 142(2)(a) of the Negotiable

Instruments Act, 1881, the complainant being the payee, is entitled to file

the complaint before the Court having jurisdiction over the place where the

bank of the payee is situated. In such circumstances, when the bank of the

petitioner is within the jurisdiction of the Judicial Magistrate No.II,

Namakkal, he ought to have taken the complaint on file, whereas, he had

erroneously returned the complaint.

4. Since the impugned order is only a return of the complaint, no

notice to the respondent is required.

3/7

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/02/2026 03:45:06 pm )

##PAGE4##

Crl.O.P.No.1590 of 2026

5. Heard learned counsel on either side and perused the materials

available on record.

6. It is the case of the petitioner that though the cheque in

question was presented for collection through Axis Bank, Gandhipuram

Branch, Coimbatore, the petitioner maintains his bank account with

Bothupatti Branch, Namakkal, within the territorial jurisdiction of the

learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal. In this regard, reliance is

placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Prakash Chimanial Sheth Vs.

Jagruti Keyur Rajpopat r

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 Back to top