TMI Blog2005 (7) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that the applicant's firm M/s singh Brothers, Dhampur, District Bijnor is a registered firm and deals in the business of Khandsari sugar, The applicant Ganga Ram (complainant) is managing partner of the firm. The contesting opposite parties are engaged in manufacturing the crystal less (Boora) and used to purchase sugar from the complainant on credit. It is stated that after the accounts were settled, outstanding amount of Rs. 53,000/ was due against the opposite parties. An account payee cheque dated 25.9.1991 was issued for a sum of Rs. 54,000/ drawn in Canara Bank Dhampur Branch, District Bijnor in the name of Singh Brothers. The cheque was dishonoured for paucity of funds. This information was received by the applicant on 24.3.199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Anr., AIR2000SC2946 . Learned counsel has argued on the basis of the aforesaid decision that no period is prescribed before which the complaint can not be filed and if filed, not disclosing the cause of action in terms of Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, the Court may not take cognizance till the time the cause of action arises to the complainant. Emphasis has been laid on the principle enunciated in the aforesaid decision; Taking cognizance of an offence by the court has to be distinguished from the filing of the complaint by the complainant. If the complaint is found to be prematured, it can await maturity, be returned to the complainant for filing later. Mere presentation of a complaint under Se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s be set aside and the learned trial court be directed to decide the case on merits instead of dismissing the complaint being premature. 4. Looking to the entire facts and circumstances of the case and hearing the counsel for respective parties, I feel that in view of the decisions of the Apex Court, the trial court should have waited and allowed the complainant to establish its case or cognizance should have been taken after expiry of the stipulated period, instead of dismissing the complaint out right as premature. The court should have taken cognizance only after necessary period had lapsed in accordance with law and cognizance should be taken subsequently. Since the complaint has been dismissed summarily, the applicant has no other a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
