Interim Order 1

Order Details: Order
Pdf Text: 1 C. C. No. 3149/SS/2018
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
complainant has filed this case before the Section-143A is effective and
requested to reject the application.
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
can invoke Section-143A(1) of the Act. This is not
exhaustive and it is more illustrative as to various
-- 1 of 2 --
2 C. C. No. 3149/SS/2018
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 09/04/2019 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. Thereafter,
on 02/08/2019 matter was posted for evidence of the complainant but
complainant did not file affidavit of examination in chief. So matter
was adjourned on 15/10/2019. On that date of hearing affidavit is not
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.
(Ketaki M. Chavan)
Metropolitan Magistrate,
Date : 18/12/2019 63rd Court, Andheri, Mumbai.
-- 2 of 2 --