RAMA BANGIA Vs. PUSHPA BUILDERS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C., the petitioner calls in question the order passed by the learned Trial Court on 22 August 1996, whereby petitioner's complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881(for short the Act), pertaining to one of the cheques being No.510517 was summarily dismissed on the ground that it was barred by limitation.

(2.) Since the question falling for consideration in this petition is a pure question of law, it is unnecessary to state the facts, which led to the filing of the complaint under Section 138 of the Act.

(3.) The short question for consideration is whether after the dishonour of a cheque, it is open to the payee to re-present it repeatedly, within the period of its validity, and if the cheque is dishonoured again, issue a fresh notice of demand under clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Act and in case of default in making payment as demanded, file a complaint on the basis of the fresh cause of action, which accrues to him thereby for a second or third time, as the case may be?