YADLAPALLI SATYAM Vs. K SEETHARAMANJANEYULU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is preferred by the complainant in C.C.No.4 of 1998 on the file of the VI Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) According to the appellant, the respondent did not dispute the liability under a promissory note and the issuing of cheque for discharge of the said liability. The learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the lower Court dismissed the complaint on the sole ground that there was no service of notice on the respondent. He further submitted that since the notice was returned with an endorsement "not available", which was sent to the correct address of the respondent, it shall be held to be proper service and the order passed by the lower Court dismissing the complaint on that ground is liable to be set aside.

(3.) In view of the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the appellant, the point for consideration is: Whether the postal endorsement "not available" made on the notice sent to the respondent amounts to valid proof of service, and whether the judgment of the lower Court dated 1-11-2000 is liable to be set aside? Point: