JAIN ASSOCIATES Vs. DEEPAK CHAUDHARY AND CO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against an order dated 17.1.1997 summoning the petitioner firm and its two partners for offence under Section 138 read with Section 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called the Act).

(2.) The contention of the petitioners herein is that there was no service of notice under Section 138 of the Act on the petitioners Jain Associates, Shri Prahlad Rai Jain and Shri Deepak Kumar Jain. The notice which purports to have been sent under registered envelope returned without any postal remark from Postal Authorities The petitioners rely on L. Mani v. Kandan Finance, 1996 Company Cases 205.

(3.) On the other hand the contention of the learned Counsel for the complainant/ respondent is that in addition to the registered envelope the notice was also sent under UPC and postal receipt of the notice was already there on the record. Accordingly the presumption is that the notice sent under UPC and the registered letter was served on the petitioners. They cleverly avoided the service of notice sent under registered post and the petitioners had knowledge of notice sent under UPC.