Order 1

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1
IN THE COURT OF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
44TH COURT, ANDHERI, MUMBAI.
C.C.No.3201/SS/2018
Mr. Shyamlal B. Joshi, ….. Complainant
Vs.
Mr. Sudhir V. Shetty ….. Accused
ORDER BLEOW EXH.NO.15
(Passed on 08/11/2023)
1. The complainant filed this application under section 143(A) of
the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act 2018 and thereby sought the
interim compensation @ 20% of the cheque amount on the ground that the
accused appeared and he pleaded not guilty.
2. Per contra, the accused filed the say and resisted the claim on
the ground that the complainant has misused the cheque which was given by
the accused as security against payment made by the complainant to him.
Hence, accused prayed to reject the application.
3. Having perused the record, I heard the learned advocates for
both the sides. Following points are formulated for my determination.
SR.
NO.
POINTS FINDINGS
1] Whether the complainant is entitled for
interim compensation during the
pendency of the trial?
Negative
2] What order? The application is rejected.
REASONS
AS TO POINT NO.1:
4. At the outside, it is pertinent to note that this is a criminal
complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This is a
summons case. It was filed on 13/08/2018. In pursuance of the process
issued under Section 204 of Cr. P.C., the accused appeared before the Court.
-- 1 of 2 --
2
He did not plead guilty. Thus, the accused claimed further trial.
5. Section 143 (A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act empowers the
Court to order the drawer of the cheque to the interim compensation to the
complainant if the drawer pleads not guilty to the allegations made in the
complaint which is a summary trial or summons case. It is settled that the
compensation amount shall not exceed 20% of the amount of the cheque in
dispute.
6. It is pertinent to note here that section 143 (A) was inserted in
the Negotiable Instruments Act by Act of 20 of 2018, section 2 (w.e.f.
01/09/2018). Thus, this section is applicable to the cases which were filed
after 01/09/2018.
7. In the case of G. J. Raja V/s. Tejraj Surana reported in 2019
SCC Online SC 989, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that the provisions
of section 143 (A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act shall be applicable in the
cases filed after 2018 of the Amendment Act.
8. Apart from this in the case of Jeet Event Classical Mobile
Novality V/s Shetye Smart Links reported in 2022 DGLS (Bom.) 3985, the
Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that section 143 (A) of the Negotiable
Instruments Act to be prospective in operation and that the provisions of the
said section 143 (A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act can be applied or
invoked only in cases where the offence under section 138 of the Act was
committed after the introduction of said section 143 (A) in the statute book.
9. In fact, this case came to filed on 13/08/2018. Therefore,
having regard to the ratio laid down in the citation supra, this Court is of
humble opinion that this application is not maintainable. Accordingly, I record
my finding in negative for point no.1 and proceed to pass the following order:
ORDER
The application stands rejected.
Sd/
( Sujitkumar C. Tayde )
Date : 08.11.2023 Metropolitan Magistrate,
44th Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --