NASEER Vs. BALAJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE above criminal original petitions have been filed by the accused in C.C.Nos.113 and 114 of 2007 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Chengalpattu, seeking to quash the proceedings therein.

(2.) THE said cases were filed by the respective respondents under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. THE contention of the petitioner is that the place of residence of the complainants is Pondicherry, the place of residence of the petitioner/accused is Ramanathapuram, UTI Bank where the cheques have been drawn is situated at T.Nagar, Chennai and the Indian Overseas Bank, where the cheques have been presented for realization is situated at Thirupuvanai and as such the complaints ought to have been filed in any one of the Courts situated at the above said places, but the complaints have been filed before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Chengalpattu, within whose territorial jurisdiction no cause of action has arisen. Since the Court situated at a place from where the legal notice has been issued will not be clothed with any territorial jurisdiction.

(3.) THE learned counsel further relied upon the decision of the Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench) in Lakshmi Travels, Nagpur Vs. G.E. Country Wide Consumer & Another reported in C.L.T. (1) 2007 1116 in support of his contentions. In the said decision in paragraph 7 it has been observed as under