SATHYA NARAYANAN K.S. Vs. PREETHI AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is preferred against the order in C.M.P.No.5683/2007 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-III, Thrissur, which was filed u/s.142 of the Negotiable Instrument Act to condone the delay of 48 days in filing a complaint u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter referred to as the N.I. Act). Complainant's case is that the accused borrowed a sum of 1,50,000/- from him and in discharge of that debt, accused issued a cheque drawn on South Indian Bank, Ollukkara branch. When it was presented for encashment, it was dishonoured for the reason of 'account closed'. The complainant demanded the amount by giving a notice in writing to the accused, but even after acceptance of notice, he failed to pay the due amount. In the circumstances, he filed a complaint, C.M.P.No.5684/2007 in the trial Court, with a petition to condone the delay of 48 days, which was dismissed by the learned Magistrate on 25.2.2008. Being aggrieved by that, he approached this Court with this revision petition.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner submitted that as the petitioner was laid up due to Chikkun Guniya, he had sufficient cause for not appearing in the trial Court for filing a complaint in time. For ascertaining the satisfaction of the Court, it is necessary to conduct an enquiry, but without any enquiry, the trial Court dismissed the petition, which is illegal, which resulted in miscarriage of justice. Hence, he prays to exercise the revisional jurisdiction to rectify the error.

(3.) I heard the learned Public Prosecutor. Notice issued to the 1st respondent was returned as unclaimed and there is no appearance for the 1st respondent.