PLAZA CABLES ELECTRIC PVT LTD Vs. KAMAL KHURANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant in this appeal is aggrieved by an order dated 13.1.2006 passed by Mr. Manoj Kumar, MM, Rohini Court, New Delhi in Criminal Complaint No. 216/2003 under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 dismissing the said complaint in default for non-prosecution.

(2.) On the date the complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act was dismissed in default for non-prosecution, it was listed for arguments on charge. Before the date the said complaint was dismissed in default, the said complaint was pending in Tis Hazari Court where the last date was 13.5.2005. On establishment of a new Court complex of the District Court at Rohini, the aforementioned complaint was transferred from Tis Hazari to Rohini Court and was to be taken up for hearing there on 13.1.2006. The lawyers were agitated by establishment of new Court complex at Rohini and at that time the lawyers remained on strike for a long time. Consequent upon transfer of complaint case of the appellant from Tis Hazari to Rohini Court, the appellant was required to appear before the Rohini Court on date fixed i.e. 13.1.2006. Since nobody appeared on his behalf on that day, the complaint was dismissed in default vide impugned order. The reasons for non appearance given by the appellant are stated in paras 7,8 and 9 of the Memorandum of Appeal and the same are reproduced hereinbelow:

(3.) The authorized representative of the appellant has filed his affidavit in support of the aforementioned grounds. I have no reason to disbelieve the same.