VISWANATHAN Vs. JOHNY PETER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) APPELLANT filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act contending that respondents herein borrowed a sum of Rs.40,000/- and in discharge of the above obligation, Ext.P1 cheque was issued by the respondent. The above cheque was dishonored for insufficiency of funds. The court below dismissed the complaint and acquitted the accused only on the sole reason that in the notice apart from the cheque amount, interest and costs were also demanded. According to the trial court in view of the decision reported in Raj v. Rajan (1997 (1) K.L.T. 302) such a notice is defective. The above decision was overruled in Kunjan Panicker v. Christudas (1997 (2) K.L.T. 539). In Suman Sethi v. Ajay K.Churiwal ((2000) 2 S.C.C. 380) Apex Court held that apart from the cheque amount, merely because interest and costs were also demanded, notice will not become insufficient for complying with the statutory formalities under Section 138 of the N.I. Act. In view of the above, I am of the view that the matter should be reconsidered by the trial court. Hence appeal is allowed by way of remand. Complainant is directed to appear before the court on 9.1.2007. Despite repeated notice respondent was evading the notice issued by this Court. Registered notice sent to the appellant was found accepted by the accused. Since appellant did not enter appearance, before hearing the matter, registered notice was also sent to his advocate appeared in the trial court. Trial court should give intimation regarding the date of posting to the counsel appearing for the accused in that court.