Order 1

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: MHMM180018792022
Summary Cases/5800208/2022
JIGNESH R SHAH Vs. MEHUL VINOD MEHTA
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, 58TH COURT,
BANDRA, MUMBAI
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION EXH.21
1. This is an application for claiming an interim compensation
filed u/sec.143-A of the Negotiable Instrument Act.
2. It is contended on behalf of the complainant that accused
was given friendly loan on his request for an amount of Rs.20,50,001/- in
between July 2017 and January 2018. The accused has issued subject
cheques in discharge of said legal liability etc. The trial will take its own
time to finalize the rights. Hence, this application.
3. Accused has objected the application vide detailed reply
Exh.23. Accused has denied any kind of transaction with the complainant
and prayed for rejecting the application.
4. Heard both sides.
5. Except denial of transaction accused has not raised any other
probable defence. So far as contentions of complainant as to making
payment of alleged friendly loan amount is concerned, the same is
supported by the various On-Line payment entries. The complainant has
produced all the relevant statements of Bank Account to establish prima
facie parting of said friendly loan to the accused.
6. In view of parameter laid down by Apex Court in the case of
Rakesh Rajan Shrivastava Vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr. Reported in
(2024) 3 S.C.R. 438, are as follows:
“19.(c) The broad parameters for exercising the discretion
under Section 143A are as follows:
i. The Court will have to prima facie evaluate the merits of
the case made out by the complainant and the merits of the
-- 1 of 3 --
2 Summary Cases/5800208/2022
Order below Exh.21
defence pleaded by the accused in the reply to the application.
The financial distress of the accused can also be a consideration.
ii. A direction to pay interim compensation can be issued,
only if the complainant makes out a prima facie case.
iii. If the defence of the accused is found to be prima facie
plausible, the Court may exercise discretion in refusing to grant
interim compensation.
iv. If the Court concludes that a case is made out to grant
interim compensation, it will also have to apply its mind to the
quantum of interim compensation to be granted. While doing
so, the Court will have to consider several factors such as the
nature of the transaction, the relationship, if any, between the
accused and the complainant, etc.
v. There could be several other relevant factors in the
peculiar facts of a given case, which can not be exhaustively
stated. The parameters stated above are not exhaustive.”
7. The complainant has made out strong prima facie case which
gives probability of succeeding in the proceeding. The application will also
have to be considered considering the probability of the trustworthy
defence. In the case in hand except mere denial there is nothing on
record to accept the defence of the accused as probable and trustworthy.
Section 139 and 118(a) of the Negotiable Instrument Act will follow for
considering the presumption of law in favour of the complainant by way
of subject cheques. This is a fit case wherein discretionary powers of this
court needs to be used. Hence, I pass following order.
O R D E R
1) The application is allowed.
2) The accused is directed to make payment of 20%
of cheques amount within 60 days to the
complainant as an interim compensation.
3) Order be uploaded on CIS.
4) Order dictated and pronounced in open court.
( M. P. Saraf )
Judicial Magistrate, First Class,
Date : 13.09.2024 58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
J.O.Code: MH01362
-- 2 of 3 --
3 Summary Cases/5800208/2022
Order below Exh.21
CERTIFICATE
I affirm that the contents of this P.D.F. file Order are same, word to word as per the
original Order.
Name of Stenographer : Mrs. Aditi Ravikiran Dalvi
Court : Judicial Magistrate (First Class), 58th Court,
Bandra, Mumbai.
Dictated in open court on : 13.09.2024.
Transcribed and Typed on : 13.09.2024.
Order printed and Signed on : 13.09.2024.
Order Uploaded on : 13.09.2024.
-- 3 of 3 --