Hemant Dandona vs Naveen Bareja
2018 Latest Caselaw 606 Del

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
%                                                Decided on: 25th April, 2018
+                              CRL.L.P. 537/2017
HEMANT DANDONA                                                ..... Petitioner
                               Represented by: Mr. Piyush Chhabra, Ms.
                                           Priyanka Tiwary and Mr. Saurabh
                                           Mishra, Advocates.
                                    versus
NAVEEN BAREJA                                              ..... Respondent
                               Represented by: Mr. D.S. Kohli and Mr. Raghav
                                               Mehdiratta, Advocates.
+                              CRL.L.P. 538/2017
HEMANT DANDONA                                                ..... Petitioner
                               Represented by: Mr. Piyush Chhabra, Ms.
                                           Priyanka Tiwary and Mr. Saurabh
                                           Mishra, Advocates.
                                    versus
NAVEEN BAREJA                                                  ..... Respondent
                               Represented by:     Mr. D.S. Kohli and Mr. Raghav
                                                   Mehdiratta, Advocates.

+                              CRL.L.P. 539/2017
HEMANT DANDONA                                                ..... Petitioner
                               Represented by: Mr. Piyush Chhabra, Ms.
                                           Priyanka Tiwary and Mr. Saurabh
                                           Mishra, Advocates.
                                    versus
NAVEEN BAREJA                                                  ..... Respondent
                               Represented by:     Mr. D.S. Kohli and Mr. Raghav
                                                   Mehdiratta, Advocates.

+                              CRL.L.P. 540/2017
HEMANT DANDONA                                                 ..... Petitioner
                               Represented by:     Mr.   Piyush Chhabra, Ms.


CRL.L.P. 537/2017 and Conn. matters                                             Page 1 of 4
                                                Priyanka Tiwary and Mr. Saurabh
                                               Mishra, Advocates.
                                      versus
NAVEEN BAREJA                                                   ..... Respondent
                               Represented by:      Mr. D.S. Kohli and Mr. Raghav
                                                    Mehdiratta, Advocates.


CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

MUKTA GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

CRL.L.P. 537/2017 CRL.L.P. 538/2017 CRL.L.P. 539/2017 CRL.L.P. 540/2017

1. After perusing the trial court record, this Court deems it fit to grant the leave to appeal petition.

2. Leave to appeal petition is disposed of.

CRL.A. _________/2018 (Registry to number the appeal) CRL.A. _________/2018 (Registry to number the appeal) CRL.A. _________/2018 (Registry to number the appeal) CRL.A. _________/2018 (Registry to number the appeal)

1. Admit.

2. Ashok Dandona had filed four complaint cases no. 996/01/15, 994/01/15, 995/1/15 and 997/01/15 under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'NI Act') alleging that in discharge of liability arising out of supply of raw materials, goods, plastic dana supplied

by him to Naveen Bareja, Naveen Bareja issued four cheques totaling to Rs. 15,01,742/-, being cheque bearing no. 995507 dated 25th May, 2013 for a sum of Rs.3,02,742/-, cheque no. 995511 dated 30th May, 2013 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/-, cheque no. 995512 dated 30th May, 2013 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- and cheque no. 995513 dated 30th May, 2013 for a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- all drawn on ICICI Bank, New Friends Colony Branch, New Delhi. Aforesaid cheques on presentation were returned unpaid vide memos dated 30th July, 2013 with remarks 'Funds Insufficient'. Ashok Dandona issued a legal notice dated 12th August, 2013 through registered post but Naveen Bareja failed to make the payment. Hence the complaints.

3. Aforesaid complaint cases were dismissed for non prosecution by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 3rd May, 2017 for non appearance of the complainant.

4. Ashok Dandona passed away on 27th April, 2017. Hemant Dandona was impleaded as the legal heir of Late Shri Ashok Dandona vide order of this Court dated 27th November, 2017.

5. It is the case of the appellant that Late Shri Ashok Dandona could not appear on 26th May, 2016 due to inadvertence of counsel of Late Shri Ashok Dandona. Thereafter, on 11th November, 2016, though the counsel for Late Shri Ashok Dandona appeared, however, by that time, the complaint were already taken up and the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate listed the complaints for 3rd May, 2017. However, since Late Shri Ashok Dandona passed away on 27th April, 2017, none could appear on his behalf on 3rd May, 2017 and thus, the complaints were dismissed for non prosecution.

6. For the documents placed on record, this Court is of the opinion that sufficient cause has been shown by the appellant for non-appearance before

the learned Trial Court on 3rd May, 2017 and the two dates prior thereto.

7. The impugned judgments dated 3rd May, 2017 dismissing the complaint cases in default under Section 256 Cr.P.C. are set aside.

8. Appeals are disposed of. Trial Court Records be sent back.

9. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Trial Court on 28th May, 2018.

10. Order dasti.

(MUKTA GUPTA) JUDGE APRIL 25, 2018 'vn'