BISHWANATH AGARWAL Vs. WODRAP CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common order I propose to dispose of these three petitions which are preferred against summoning orders dated 5.7.2005 in Complaint Case Nos. 1856/2005,1857/2005 and 1858/2005 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The petitioner is challenging the said orders on the ground that the complaints filed by the respondent here are premature and have been filed before the time limit prescribed under the Act for the service of notice had expired.

(2.) THE complaint filed by the respondent is based on the allegations that the petitioner had issued certain cheques, which were dishonoured with the Banker's endorsement "Stop Payment" dated 12.4.2005 sent on 14.4.2005. The respondent accordingly sent legal notice under Section 138 of the Act dated 12.5.2005 and thereafter the complaint was filed on 24.5.2005. On the basis of pre-summoning evidence the learned ACMM has passed summoning orders dated 5.7.2005. Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that since the respondent has not stated as to on which date notice was served, as per the presumption under the General Clauses Act one month's time is to be given and, therefore, notice would be deemed to have been served only on 12.6.2005. The petitioner was to be given 15 days' time for making payment which would expire on 27.6.2005. In these circumstances, filing of the complaint on 24.5.2005 much before the deemed date of service would clearly be premature and could not have been entertained by the learned ACMM.

(3.) IT is not in dispute that the notice was sent by registered AD post as well as UPC at the correct address of the petitioner herein. It is presumptuous on the part of the petitioner to contend that the notice would be deemed to be served as per the General Clauses Act after the expiry of one month's period and, therefore, the deemed date of service would be 17.6.2005. Section 27 of the General Clauses Act which draws presumption of service when the letter is sent by post by properly addressing, pre-paying and posting by registered post does not lay down any such period. Section 27 of the General Clauses Act is reproduced for this purpose: