TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 4
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ailed a friendly loan of Rs.13,50,000/- in the month of September, 2013 from the appellant and in discharge of his legal liability and to return the said amount, the respondent No.2 had issued a cheque bearing No. 311606 dated 10.02.2014 for a sum of Rs.13,50,000/- drawn on Andhra Pradesh Bank, Palam Vihar Branch, Gurgaon in favour of the appellant. However, the said cheque when presented by the appellant for encashment with his Banker - HDFC Bank Ltd, New Delhi, was returned dishonoured by bank of Respondent No.2 with the endorsement "Insufficient Funds" and the information regarding dishonour of cheque was received by the appellant by way of 'cheque return memo' dated 12.02.2014. Thereafter, appellant had also sent a legal notice dated 28....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rsuant to which accused had appeared before the Court and the matter was proceeded further by the Court in accordance with the law." 4. Thereafter, as per prescribed procedure, the matter was fixed for complainant's evidence and the accused had sought opportunity to cross- examine the witness(es) of the complainant, which request of the accused/respondent No.2 was allowed by the Court. Subsequently, the complainant/appellant was cross-examined by the counsel of the accused/respondent No.2 in part on 04.03.15 and the matter was adjourned for 20.03.15 on the request of the counsel of the respondent No.2/Accused for completion of complainant's evidence. 5. On 20.03.2015, appellant/complainant was further cross examined by the counsel....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 could be filed and maintained only at the place where the branch of the bank where the bank account of the Payee is situated." 7. Learned counsel further submits that the aforesaid fact and law was brought to the kind knowledge of the Magistrate First Class, Gurugram on 15.09.15 and it was requested to the Court to transfer the matter to the competent Court and the Court after hearing the submissions of the counsel for the appellant/complainant was pleased to fix the matter for 29.10.2015 for consideration. On the said date, the Court, after appreciating the true position of law, was pleased to return and transfer the complaint to the competent Court i.e. District Courts, Tis Hazari, Delhi and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... and article number and other details were never provided as they said that the same was not traceable. However, registry was continuously assuring that they were searching the required details and as soon as they will get it will be apprised the same to the complainant/his counsel but it was never provided either to the complainant or his counsel. 11. Learned counsel further submits that for recovery of the loan amount of Rs.13,50,000/-, a summary suit was also filed by the Appellant before the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi against the respondent No.2. In the said suit also, notice to the respondent No.2 was issued and he had filed his leave to defend application, which was allowed by the Court and t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....granted by the said order. Order sheet further reveals that on 19.03.2018, none appeared on behalf of the respondent No. 2 and leave was granted vide the said order. 15. Keeping in view the fact that initially the appellant had filed complaint under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act before the Courts in Delhi and thereafter, in view of the Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod (Supra), the same was returned and filed before the Court of Gurugram (Haryana). Thereafter, due to the amendment in the year 2015, whereby the decision passed in Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod (Supra) by the Hon'ble Supreme Court had been nullified. Consequently, the complaint filed by the appellant at Gurugram (Haryana) was transferred from there to the District Court, Delhi. 1....