LAW FOR ALL

Return of Cheque bounce complaints by Delhi High court -Metropolitan Magistrates in Delhi have taken cognizance only because the statutory notices in terms of proviso to Section 138 of the Act have been issued to the drawers of the cheque from Delhi. - Apex court held that we have no hesitation in holding that the issue of a notice from Delhi or deposit of the cheque in a Delhi bank by the payee or receipt of the notice by the accused demanding payment in Delhi would not confer jurisdiction upon the Courts in Delhi. What is important is whether the drawee bank who dishonoured the cheque is situate within the jurisdiction of the Court taking cognizance. In that view, we see no reason to interfere with the order passed by the High Court which simply requires the Magistrate to examine and return the complaints if they do not have the jurisdiction to entertain the same in the light of the legal position as stated in Harman’s case (supra). All that we need to add is that while examining the question of jurisdiction the Metropolitan Magistrates concerned to whom the High Court has issued directions shall also keep in view the decision of this Court in Dashrath’s case (supra).= CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8468 OF 2014 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.29044 of 2009) Vinay Kumar Shailendra …Appellant Versus Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee and Anr. …Respondents= 2014 - Sept. Month - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41877