TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (2) TMI 1243
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ication No. 12606 of 2004 has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C.") by accused-applicant Mahesh Chandra Maheshwari with a prayer to quash summoning order dated 21.11.2000 and another order dated 15.11.2004 whereby objection filed by accused-applicant against order of summoning has been rejected. 3. Facts, in brief, giving rise to the Application No. 12606 of 2004 are that M/s Bhadohi Urban Cooperative Bank Limited (hereinafter referred to as "Cooperative Bank") advanced a loan to applicant for a running medical shop. In discharge of aforesaid loan, applicant issued cheques No. 823486 and 823487 dated 29.03.2007 for Rs. 50,000/-, each, in favour of Cooperative Bank drawn on....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not maintainable having been filed by Assistant Manager who was not authorized by any Letter of Authorization or Resolution of Board of Directors of Cooperative Bank. He also contended that proceedings were initiated beyond the period prescribed under Section 138(b) of Act, 1881, inasmuch as, dishonoured cheques were returned to complainant on 24.08.2000, notice was issued on 06.09.2000 which was received back unclaimed on 14.09.2000 but complaint was filed on 31.10.2000, hence, it was barred by period of limitation prescribed under Section 142(b) of Act, 1881. 4. Said objection was rejected by Chief Judicial Magistrate concerned vide order dated 15.10.2004. Sri Bajpai, placed reliance on a Supreme Court's judgement in M/s Sil Import....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provisions of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for a term which may be extend to one year, or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both: Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless- ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder section 138." (Emphasis added) 8. As per complaint, following dates are relevant: Date Events 24.08.2000 Cheques were submitted for collection by complainant-Cooperative Bank. 24.08.2000 Union Bank of India, Main Branch, Varanasi vide Memo of date informed Bombay Mercantile Cooperative Bank Limited, Nai Sadak, Varanasi that sufficient funds are not available in the account of applicant. .. M/s Bombay Mercantile Cooperative Bank Limited, Nai Sadak, Varanasi thereafter returned said cheques unpaid to Cooperative Bank. 06.09.2000 Registered notice sent to applicant demanding amount of dishonoured cheque after informing the factum of dishonouring of cheques by Union Bank of India. 14.09.2000 Notice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., 1881. Since payment could have been made upto 29.09.2000 but when it is not made, cause of action arose on 30.09.2000. 12. The term "month" has not been defined in Act, 1881 but it is defined in Section 3(35) of General Clauses Act, 1897 (hereinafter referred to as "Act, 1897") and reads as under:- "(35) "month" shall mean a month reckoned according to the British calendar. " (Emphasis added) 13. The definition of "month" in Act, 1897, therefore, talks of a month of British Calendar i.e. January, February etc. 14. There are 12 months in a British Calendar wherein 7 months have 31 days; 4 months have 30 days and one month has 28 days except leap year when it has 29 days. Therefore, number of days in the month varies. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ies Limited 1999 (3) SCC 1, therefore, reference was made for considering correctness of aforesaid judgement by a Larger Bench and it was considered by a Bench of three Judges in ECON Antri Ltd. (supra). 18. Upholding view taken in Saketh India Limited and Others (supra), Larger Bench said, where a particular time is given from a certain date within which act has to be done, the day of the date of cause of action is to be excluded. 19. Consequently, Larger Bench held that M/s Sil Import USA (supra) does not lay down correct law and upheld view taken in Saketh India Limited and Others (supra). Para-25 of ECON Antri Ltd. (supra) reads as under:- "25. Having considered the question of law involved in this case in proper perspect....