Pec Ltd vs Prime Impex Ltd & Ors
2011 Latest Caselaw 5058 Del

$~ 29
*    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+            CRL.Rev. P. No.456/2011

%            Judgment delivered on:13th October, 2011

        PEC LTD                          ..... Petitioner
                         Through : Mr. Sanjeev Narula, &
                              Mr.Ashish Virmani, Advs.

                              versus

        PRIME IMPEX LTD & ORS          ..... Respondent
                             Through: NEMO.

CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT

     1. Whether the Reporters of local papers
        may be allowed to see the judgment?         No.
     2. To be referred to Reporter or not?          No.
     3. Whether the judgment should be reported
        in the Digest?                              No.

SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)

CRL. M.A.12085/2011(Exemption)

Exemption is allowed subject to just exceptions.

Criminal M.A. stands disposed of.

CRL.REV.P. 456/2011

1. Vide this Petition, the Petitioner has challenged the

order dated 26.8.2011 passed by Ld. MM (3) / Negotiable

Instruments Act and submits that in the instant case, the

substantial cause of action has arisen with the territorial

jurisdiction of Delhi Courts on the grounds as under:-

1. That the registered office of the Petitioner/Complainant is at Delhi.

2. That the Associateship Agreement between the parties was executed at Delhi.

3. That the Letters of Credit were also opened at New Delhi.

4. That the Petitioner/Complainant maintains the Ledger Accounts/Statement of Accounts of the Accused Company at New Delhi.

5. That the Petitioner / Complainant presented the cheques for encashment to its Banker, situated at Delhi.

6. That the cheques, upon being dishonoured when presented to the Bankers of the Respondent / Accused, were returned to the petitioner / Complainant through its bankers at Delhi.

7. That the legal notice was dispatched by the Petitioner/Complainant to the Respondent / Accused from Delhi.

2. Vide Judgment dated 09.09.2011 in Crl. Rev. P.

170/2010, GE Capital Transportation Financial Services Ltd.

Vs. Rahisuddin Khan, view has been taken on the jurisdiction

keeping the case of K. Bhaskaran Vs. S B Balan AIR 1999

SC 3762, whereby 5 ingredients were decided for offences

U/s 138 NI Act as under:-

"The Offence u/s 138 NI Act can be completed only with the concatenation of a number of acts. Following are the acts which are components of the said offence:-

1. Drawing of the cheque, 2. Presentation of the cheque to the bank, 3. Returning the cheque unpaid by drawee bank, 4. Giving notice in writing to the drawer of the cheuque demanding payment of the cheque amount, 5. Failure of the drawer to make payment within 15 days of the receipt of the notice."

"----If the five different acts were done in different localities any one of the courts exercising jurisdiction in one of the five local areas can become place of trial for offence u/s 138 NI Act.

3. Since, I have already taken a view in the aforesaid

case, I accordingly allow Crl. Rev.456/2011. Consequently, I

set aside the order/judgment dated 26.8.2011 passed by ld.

MM.

4. Accordingly, Crl.M.A.12084/2011 renders infructuous

and stands disposed of.

5. Petitioner is directed to appear before the trial court on

01.11.2011 for directions.

SURESH KAIT, J

October 13th 2011/JG