(1.) By this petition, petitioner seeks quashing of complaint No. 5838/2009 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short hereinafter referred to as the "Act"), pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi.
(2.) Counsel for the petitioner contends that entire cause of action had arisen at Mumbai; inasmuch as parties are residents of Mumbai. Cheques in question were issued at Mumbai; cheques were presented for encashment at Mumbai. Drawers bank on which cheques had been drawn was also in Mumbai. In spite of this, complaint had been preferred at Delhi by the respondent through his Attorney, who happens to be residing in Delhi only on the ground that the statutory notice had been issued by a lawyer from New Delhi. It is contended that mere issuance of the statutory notice from Delhi would not vest jurisdiction in Delhi Courts to entertain and try the complaint under Section 138 of the Act. Reliance has been placed on Harman Electronics (P) Ltd. & Anr. v. M/s. National Panasonic India Ltd., 2009 AIR(SC) 1168
(3.) I have perused the complaint which has been annexed with this petition as Annexure A. A perusal thereof clearly shows the address of the respondent as also of the petitioner, as mentioned in the complaint, is that of Mumbai. Father of the petitioner has been impleaded as accused No. 2, whose address has also been shown as that of Mumbai. Respondent is working as Cardio Thoracic Vascular Surgeon in Mumbai. It is alleged that he had operated father of petitioner at Breach Candy Hospital, Mumbai. Towards his fee certain cheques were issued, which included the cheques in question, drawn on HDFC Bank, 22-25 Ground Floor Ashoka Shopping Center, Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai. It is these cheques which had been returned dishonored on presentation. In fact, respondent had deposited these cheques for encashment in his bank i.e. Standard Chartered Bank, 50, Bhula Bhai Desai Road, Mumbai. From the above it is clear that entire cause of action had arisen at Mumbai.