TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (10) TMI 102
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rt in Criminal Writ Petition No. 3189 of 2014, by which the issue process order dated 16th September 2013, passed against Respondent No. 1 herein, by the Metropolitan Magistrate, 7th Court, Dadar, Mumbai in Criminal Complaint No. 1675/SS/2013, was quashed and set aside. 2. The brief facts of the case are as follows: 3.1. The Applicant (Original Respondent No. 1/ Complainant) is a private limited company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act. Respondent No. 1 (Original Petitioner) is the Managing Director of Usher Agro Limited, a company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act; Respondent No. 2-M/s Swajay Finance Pvt. Ltd. (Original Respondent No. 2) is also a company incorporated and registered under the Comp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Yashpal Thakur, learned Counsel, appeared for Respondent No. 1 4. Mr Khan submitted that the Applicant appeared and contested the proceedings from 2014, however, due to bona fide reasons, including a change in advocate and the inability of the new advocate to formally appear for want of NOC from previous advocate, there was no effective representation on behalf of the Applicant when the matter was taken up for final hearing. The Applicant had no knowledge of the matter being circulated or listed. 5. He further submitted that the impugned Order should be recalled, as it was passed without affording the Applicant an opportunity to present his case. He also submitted that the High Court is vested with the power to recall an order passed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. vs State of U.P. and Ors. 2019 (3) ALJ 407. He thus prayed that the application be dismissed. 7. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the respective parties and perused the record with their assistance. 8. A plain reading of the Order sought to be recalled reveals that the Order is passed on the merits of the matter. This Court has considered the averments made in the Complaint of the Applicant as well as the documents on record. In doing so, the Court examined and applied the provisions of Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, in the context of the facts of the case. Only after carefully perusing the facts and applying the relevant provisions of law, this Court passed the impugned Order. 9. This Court....