IKM INVESTORS SERVICES LTD Vs. KIRANPAL KAPOOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been made by the petitioner for setting aside the order dated 17th April, 2006 passed by the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate.

(2.) Brief facts are that the petitioner filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and the same was fixed on 17th April, 2006 before the court of Metropolitan Magistrate. On that day the counsel for the petitioner, in whose favour 'vakalatnama', was signed by the petitioner did not appear before the Court on the ground that the advocates were on strike. The learned Court of Metropolitan Magistrate initially called the case in the morning, but when none appeared passed over the case. The case was recalled at 2.25 p.m., none appeared even at 2.25 p.m. and the complaint was dismissed in default.

(3.) In the petition, the plea taken by the petitioner's counsel is that the advocates were on strike and the advocate of the petitioner thought that attorney of the petitioner would appear in the Court and take adjournment. However, the attorney of the petitioner had left the services of the petitioner around the same time, so he did not appear before the Trial Court and he wrongly instructed the new incumbent about the next date of hearing as 26.7.2006. On 26.7.2006 when the new AR of the petitioner went to Court, he came to know that the case of the petitioner had been dismissed on 17.4.2006.