Mahalaxmi Concrete Products Humnabad-Bidar Humnabad, Represented by Authorized Representative v. Mahaveer Elecro-Mech (P) Ltd Represented by its Managing Director/Chairman,Secretary/Manager. Rangaram
2013-01-03
MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR
body2013
DigiLaw.ai
Judgment :- 1. By the impugned order, the Court below has dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioners under Section-138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for non- prosecution. 2. Since the impugned order is passed without notice to respondents, notice to respondents is dispensed with. 3. The order sheet maintained by the Court below reveals that on 28.5.2012, the complainant and his counsel were absent and there was no representation. Hence the matter was adjourned to 11.6.2012 for recording the sworn statement. On 11.6.2012 the complainant was again absent. However, the complainant's advocate viz., KBB (Kalyani Biradar) has submitted before the Court that he has no instructions from the complainant inasmuch as the complainant had not approached him inspite of issuing notice. Thus on the next date i.e. 27.6.2012 the complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. 4. Sri Ravi B. Patil, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that the complainant had engaged him to appear before the trial Court, but by the time he could appear before the trial Court, the complaint was dismissed for non-prosecution. The said submission of Sri Patil cannot be accepted. There is nothing on record to show that he has made any representation on any of the dates of hearing prior to dismissal of the complaint. The Court is not expected to wait for the litigant to appear. Therefore, the litigant who absents himself before the Court needs to suffer. Virtually there is no illegality in the order of the Court below. This petition in the normal course would have been dismissed. However, having regard to the stakes involved in the matter, this Court proposes to take lenient view for giving an opportunity of hearing to the complainant in the Court below. The impugned order stands set aside. P.C. No.342/2011 is restored to the file of the Court below. The complainant shall appear before the trial Court on 21st January 2013 at 11 a.m. alongwith copy of this order without fail. It is made clear that no further leniency would be shown in case if the complainant absents himself on the said date. The complainant should proceed with the matter regularly. This order would be subject to the condition that the petitioners should deposit costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) before the Court below on or before 23rd January 2013. Criminal Petition is allowed accordingly.