Order 1

Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 3805/SS/2018
ORDER BELOW APPLICATION U/S.143A OF N.I. ACT.
1. This is an application made by complainant under Section
143A 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
provision is directory in nature. Since, no reason is assigned for
claiming interim compensation, it is not desirable to exercise the
discretion. None of the requirements for grant of compensation are
satisfied. There is no justifiable reason exists for grant of interim
compensation as prayed by the complainant.
3. Heard both sides. 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.
Para9 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
crossexamine the witnesses and keeps on dragging with the
proceeding by filing one petition after another or accused
persons absconds and by virtue of a nonbailable warrant he
is secured and brought before the Court after long time or he
-- 1 of 2 --
2 C. C. No. 3805/SS/2018
files a recall non bailable warrant petition after a long time
and the Court while considering his petition for recalling a
non bailable warrant can invoke Section143A(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.10. He pleaded not guilty. Instead of
filing affidavit of examination in chief complainant moved this
application. On 24/09/2019 accused filed say to this application and
advanced argument. It may be noted that on 24/09/2019 also
complainant also did not tender his affidavit of examination in chief.
Today matter was listed for order on this application. It is pertinent to
note that today complainant and advocate are absent. No affidavit of
examination in chief is tendered. So I do not find it proper to exercise
discretion given u/s.143A of N.I. Act. Hence, order :
ORDER
Application stands rejected.
Sd/
(Ketaki M. Chavan)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date : 20/11/2019 63rd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --