Order 1

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 27 CC NI ACT / 2442/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance
Company Limited Vs. Dinesh kumar
28 CC NI ACT / 2443/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Bohra Trading Company Through Ghanshyam Sharma
31 CC NI ACT / 2446/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Mamta Trading Company Through Kallu
32 CC NI ACT / 2447/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Jamshed Alam Fruit Treding Through Jamshed Alam 33 CC NI ACT /
2448/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited Vs. Shivhari
H P Gas Centre Through Ram Pravesh Yadav 34 CC NI ACT / 2449/2026
Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company Limited Vs. Nandani Traders
Through Manish Kumar
35 CC NI ACT / 2450/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. MS Arohi Enterprises Through Dheeraj Kumar Gupta
36 CC NI ACT / 2451/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Mad Gallery Through Dhwani Lalwani
38 CC NI ACT / 2453/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Shiv Soya Udyog Through Shiv Khandelwal
40 CC NI ACT / 2455/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Rudra Agency Through Ashish Kumar
41 CC NI ACT / 2456/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. M Shamshuddin Contractor Through Mohammad Kasim
43 CC NI ACT / 2458/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Agrawal Trading Company Through Ajay Kansal
46 CC NI ACT / 2461/2026 Cholamandalam Investment and Finance Company
Limited Vs. Personal Enterprises Through Monis
12.08.2026
Present: Sh. Rajiv Ranjan, Ld. Counsel for the Complainant.
Perusal of complaint shows that the present matter has been filed
after 01.07.2024 and the same falls under Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Adhiniyam,
2023 (BNSS). As per Proviso 1 to Section 223 of BNSS, it is mandatory to hear
the proposed accused before taking cognizance. However, in light of the judgment
of the Hon’ble Supreme court in ‘
Sanjabij Tari Vs. Kishore S Borcar’, 2025 INSC
1158, the requirement of hearing the accused on the point of cognizance is
dispensed with.
-- 1 of 3 --
Accordingly, arguments on cognizance and summoning heard on
behalf of complainant.
I have gone through the entire record including the complaint and the
documents. It is alleged that accused has executed the ECS Mandate in question in
favour of the complainant to discharge his liability which got dishonored due to
insufficient funds. Therefore, demand notice was sent to the accused by the
complainant. Despite service/ deemed service of said notice, accused has failed to
make the payment as per provisions of law.
The counsel for the complainant submits that dictum of "A. C.
Narayanan Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr." (2014) 11 SCC 790 is also applicable
to complaints u/s 25 of Payment and Settlement Act, 2007.
In the aforesaid judgment, Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held
that "...it is a matter of discretion and the Magistrate is not bound to call upon the
complainant to remain present before the court and to examine him upon oath for
taking decision whether or not to issue process on the complaint under Section 138
of the NI Act. For the purpose of issuing process under Section 200 of the Code, it
is open to the Magistrate to rely upon the verification in the form of affidavit filed
by the complainant in support of the complaint under Section 138 of the NI Act..."
Complaint, affidavit of evidence and documents considered in light
of above cited judgment. In opinion of this Court, there is no need to examine the
complainant for purpose of issuance of process. In view of complaint, documents
produced and verification in the form of affidavit of evidence, there are sufficient
grounds for proceeding further against accused person(s) for offence punishable u/s
25 of Payment and Settlement Act, 2007.
Hence, accused/s be summoned through all permissible modes
(including dasti) for offence u/s 25 of Payment and Settlement Act, 2007 on filing
of PF/RC within one month. In the event the house/office/premises is found to be
locked/refusal to accept the service/any other contingency the process be served
through affixation.
Put up for appearance of accused on 07.04.2027.
-- 2 of 3 --
At 03:00 P.M.
At this stage, Ld. Counsel for the Complainant has appeared through
VC and has submitted that there are chances of settlement between the parties and
requested that the matter may be referred to Lok Adalat.
In view of the submissions, let the matter be referred to National lok
adalat on 12.09.2026.
In case, no settlement is arrived at between the parties before Lok
Adalat, matter be listed for aforesaid purpose for date already fixed i.e. 07.04.2027.
(Arvind Tomar)
JMFC (NI ACT)-07 (Central)/THC
12.08.2026
-- 3 of 3 --