NAVEEN SHETTY Vs. RAJESH POOJARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the records.

(2.) THE petitioner herein lodged a private complaint against the respondent alleging the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(3.) IT is seen from the records that there is a specific averment in the complaint and also in the evidence of the complainant that he issued a legal notice under Section 138 of the N.I. Act under Registered Post Acknowledgement Due and Ex. P4 is the Acknowledgement of the accused, which is placed before the court. According to the complainant, it bears the signature of the accused or even any person who may be authorized by the accused to receive such notice. When once the letter is addressed to the correct address of the accused and if it is shown to the court that the said letter has been addressed to the accused and acknowledgement returned duly served, according to the General Clauses Act, the Court has to raise a presumption that it has been reached the destination, even, in fact the notice might not have been served on the accused. If the accused person takes -up the contention that the notice has not been served upon him, by virtue of the presumption raised in the complaint, the burden shifts on to the accused to establish that the said notice has not been served upon him. In this regard, it is worth to refer Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, which reads as under: -