KRISHNAKUMAR VISHWANATHPRASAD CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this appeal, appellant (original complainant) impugns judgment and order dated 21st December, 2005 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, FC, 23rd Court and Special Court (for trial of cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act) whereby complaint of appellant has been dismissed solely on the ground that it was barred by limitation.

(2.) It is not disputed that legal notice was sent by complainant on 10.9.2004 making demand of money under dishonoured cheque within fifteen days of the receipt of notice. Postal acknowledgment filed on record as Document No.7 shows that below her signature, accused has not put the date of receipt. Postal stamp on the acknowledgment mentions the date "14.9.04" as to the delivery thereof to complainant. Accused in her statement recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. states that she received legal notice on 13.9.2004. Complainant also states in paragraph 6 of his complaint that accused received notice on 13.9.2004. Limitation of thirty days to file complaint would, therefore, start running from 27.9.2004. Complaint was filed by appellant on 2.11.2004. Complaint having been filed beyond the period of thirty days from the accrual of cause of action was obviously barred by time. Complaint was unaccompanied by an application for condonation of delay.

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant submits that application for condonation of delay was moved, but the trial Court did not consider the same. He submits that it was, in fact, not necessary to move such an application since fifteen days' time for compliance by accused would start running from 16.9.2004 when complainant received postal acknowledgment, but by way of abundant precaution, application for condonation of delay was moved.