Skip to main content
Court Order

Final Order 1

CNR MHMM18007491201803 Jan 2023
Back to Case

Full Order Text

Final Order 1 · 03 Jan 2023 · CNR MHMM180074912018

Order Details: Order Below EX 1
Pdf Text: C.C.NO. : 241/MISC/2018
M/s.Kesari MICE DIV. of
M/s.Kesari Tours Private Limited
Vs.
Mr.Nitin Sadekar
MHMM180074912018
ORDER BELOW EXH.01 IN C.C.NO.241/SS/2018
(Dated 03.01.2023)
1. This is an application to condon the delay to file the
complaint u/s.138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant
issued demand notice on 25.04.2018, which is delivered to the accused
on 28.04.2018. The accused ought to have refund cheque amount on
or before 13.05.2018. Thus, the complainant has to file the complaint
on or before 13.06.2018. But the present complaint filed on
04.07.2018. Accordingly, the complaint is filed after 21 days delay.
2. Ld. Advocate of the complainant submitted that the accused
assured to the complainant that he will pay the amount therefore, the
complainant has not filed complaint against the accused. Accordingly,
such delay is caused.
3. The notice is duly served upon the accused but the accused
not appeared to contest the application.
4. In view of section 142 of Negotiable Instrument Act, no
court shall take cognizance of offence punishable u/sec.138 except
upon a complaint in writing made by the payee or holder in due course
of the cheque and such complaint is made within one month of the date
on which the cause of action arise under clause (c) of proviso to section
138, provided that the cognizance may be taken after the prescribed
period if the complainant satisfies the court that he had sufficient cause
for not making the complaint within such period.
-- 1 of 2 --
C.C.NO. : 241/MISC/2018
M/s.Kesari MICE DIV. of
M/s.Kesari Tours Private Limited
Vs.
Mr.Nitin Sadekar
5. In the present case, cause of action was arose on
13.05.2018. The complainant never turned to the court for 21 days. The
complainant submitted that he has not filed complaint because the
accused assured him that he will pay the amount. The said reason is not
genuine and sufficient to condoned the delay. The complainant has has
not duly explained reason for delay. There is no inability of the
complainant to file the case within stipulated period. The complainant
caused delay without sufficient reason. In such circumstances, in my
view, delay shall not be condoned. Hence, I proceed to pass following
order :
O R D E R
The application of the complaint is rejected.
( M. Y. Wagh )
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date : 03.01.2023 58th Court, Bandra, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --

TrustJury presents public court-record information for legal discovery and reference. Record availability and detail can vary by source and case.