Order 1

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 23/SS/2019
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION U/S.143A OF N.I. ACT.
1. This is an application made by complainant under Section
143-A of the Negotiable Instrument Act with the prayer that accused be
directed to pay 20 % of cheque amount towards interim compensation
to complainant.
2. Application is opposed by accused on the ground that
accused are not liable to pay any liability to the complainant. There is
no justifiable reason exists for grant of interim compensation as prayed
by the complainant.
3. Heard learned both sides. Now I usefully take the reference
of criteria laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Madras in the case
of L.G.R. Enterprises and another V/s. P. Anbazhagan
MANU/TN/4768/2019. Para-9 of the said judgment is as follows :
“9.- Therefore, whenever the trial court exercise its
jurisdiction u/s.143A(1) of the Act. it shall record reasons
as to why it directs the accused person to pay interim
compensation to the complainant. The reasons may be
varied. For instance, the accused persons would have
absconded for a long time and thereby would have
protracted the proceedings or the accused person would
have intentionally evaded service for a long time and only
after repeated attempts, appears before the Court, or the
enforceable debt or liability in a case is borne out by
overwhelming material which the accused person could not
on the face of it deny or where the accused persons accepts
the debt or liability partly or where the accused person
does not cross-examine the witnesses and keeps on
dragging with the proceeding by filing one petition after
another or accused persons absconds and by virtue of a
non-bailable warrant he is secured and brought before the
Court after long time or he files a recall non bailable
warrant petition after a long time and the Court while
considering his petition for recalling a non bailable warrant
-- 1 of 2 --
2 C. C. No. 23/SS/2019
can invoke Section-143A(1) of the Act. This is not
exhaustive and it is more illustrative as to various
circumstances under which the trial court will be justified
in exercising its jurisdiction u/s.143A(1) of the Act by
directing the accused person to pay the interim
compensation of 20% to the complainant.”
4. In the touchstone of these illustrative circumstances, I
perused record to ascertain the conduct of accused. Upon perusal of
record it appears that none of the above quoted circumstances exists in
the present matter. Rather, accused appears to be diligent. On the
contrary, on the first date of appearance i.e. on 02/08/2019 plea of
accused is recorded vide Ex No.11. They pleaded not guilty. On that
date itself, instead of filing affidavit of examination in chief
complainant moved this application. On 30/09/2019 matter was posted
for evidence of the complainant. But till today complainant has not filed
its affidavit of examination in chief. So I do not find it proper to
exercise discretion given u/s.143A of N.I. Act. Hence, order :
ORDER
Application stands rejected.
(Ketaki M. Chavan)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date : 17/12/2019 63rd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --