Presumption of due service of statutory notice under cheque dishonour law upheld where notice was sent by registered post.

In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, dispatch of the statutory demand notice by registered post to the correct address raises a presumption of due service under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and the ordinary-course presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act. The complaint need not plead the exact date of actual receipt if the record otherwise shows cheque dishonour, notice dispatch, expiry of the statutory period, and filing of the complaint. On those facts, the objection of non-service failed and the summoning order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the complaint and accompanying material disclosed sufficient service of statutory notice so as to sustain the summoning order under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis: The complaint stated that the notice was sent by registered post to the correct address, and the surrounding documents showed the cheque dishonour, dispatch of notice, expiry of the statutory period, and filing of the complaint. Service of notice is not required to be proved by pleading an exact date in the complaint if the record otherwise makes the material dates ascertainable. A presumption of due service arises from registered-post dispatch under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, and the Court may also draw the ordinary-course presumption under Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory notice requirement is satisfied when notice is shown to have been properly sent and the contrary is not established.

Conclusion: The objection regarding non-service of notice failed, and the summoning order was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: In a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, proof of dispatch of demand notice by registered post to the correct address raises a presumption of due service, and the complaint need not plead an exact date of actual receipt if the material dates can otherwise be ascertained from the record.

---