DINESH JEENAGAR Vs. BABULAL SAMARIYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties. The instant misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioner/complainant challenging the order dated 9.3.2010 passed by the Special Judicial Magistrate (N.I. Act Cases) No.2, Udaipur rejecting the complaint filed by the petitioner under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in default and the order dated 2.5.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Udaipur rejecting the revision filed by the petitioner against the said order.

(2.) The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was not at fault in the matter because on the date fixed for hearing before the trial court i.e. on 30.9.2009, the matter was transferred to another court and as the petitioner was not aware about the transferee court, he could not appear before the court for giving evidence. He submits that prior to that, the petitioner was not responsible for the delay in the matter because the matter was mostly adjourned as the lawyers were not attending the Court as they were observing strike. He thus submits that the order dated 9.3.2010 rejecting the complaint filed by the petitioner, the order dated 3.1.2012 rejecting the application for restoration of the complaint and the order dated 2.5.2012 rejecting the revision be quashed.

(3.) Learned counsel for the accused respondent no.1 opposes the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner.