VIKRAM JOSHI Vs. RAJ TRADING COMPANY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset has argued that the complaint filed by respondent titled as M/s Raj Trading Company Vs. Chintpurni Foods Private Limited and others is premature as legal notice after dishonour of the cheque was sent on 06.07.2016 and was received by petitioner on 21.07.2016. The complaint filed on 22.07.2016, as such clear period of 15 days was not allowed to petitioner to answer the notice. In support of his contentions, he has relied upon the observations in the case of Yogendra Pratap Singh Vs. Savitri Pandey, reported as 2015 (1) SCC (Civil) 92. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly concedes that the complaint was premature. However, he seeks liberty to file fresh complaint as per the observations in the case of Yogendra Pratap Singh (supra).

(2.) In the aforesaid case, the Hon'ble Apex Court had formulated two questions for consideration, which reads as follows:-

(3.) As per above observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court, this petition is allowed. The complaint filed by the respondent titled as M/s Raj Trading Company Vs. Chintpurni Foods Private Limited and others, is quashed, with liberty to the respondent to file a fresh complaint within a period of 30 days and seek condonation of delay in filing the complaint. The application, if so filed, shall be considered as per the spirit of observations in the case of Yogendra Pratap Singh (supra).