LexM/S APEX DISTRIBUTORS & ANR. versus M/S TIMEX GROUP INDIA LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
[2014] 6 S.C.R. 1138
MIS APEX DISTRIBUTORS & ANR.
v.
MIS TIMEX GROUP INDIA LTD.
(Transfer Petition (CRL.) No. 197 of 2012)
AUGUST 5, 2014
[T.S. THAKUR AND C. NAGAPPAN, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s.406 - Transfer'bf
c criminal complaint - Dishonour of cheque issued on Ve/lore
b_ank - Complaint uls. 138 NI Act filed in Delhi - Transfer
Petition seeking transfer from Delhi Court to Ve/lore Court -
Held: The cheque was dishonoured at Ve/lore where the bank
on which it was drawn was located - No reason why the
D complaint filed by the respondents should not be transferred
to Ve/lore for further proceedings - The fact that petitioner
No. 2 was suffering from several medical problems also
relevant for deciding the transfeiof the proceedings from Delhi
to Ve/lore - The complaint directed to be transferred from
E Courts in Delhi to the Magistrate at Ve/lore who shall try the
case himself or transfer the same to any other Court
competent to try the same - Issue of statutory notice
demanding payment of cheque amount in Delhi would not
vest Delhi Court with jurisdiction to entertain complaint and
try the case - Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - s.138 -
F Notice.
The petitioners issued a cheque on Vyasa Bank,
Vellore, Tamilnadu in favour of respondent which got
dishonoured. The respondent issued a notice on the
G petitioners in Delhi for making payment of cheque
amount. As the petitioners did not make the payment, the
respondent filed a complaint und1n section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The \complainant
justified the institution of the case in Delhi on the ground
H
1138
'
APEX DISTRIBUTORS & ANR. v. TIMEX GROUP
1139
INDIA LTD.
that the statutory notices demanding payment of the
A
cheque amount were issued to the petitioners from Delhi.
The Magistrate issued summons to the petitioners.
The petitioners filed the instant Transfer Petition
under 406, Cr.P.C. for seeking transfer of complaint filed
under·section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 pending before Delhi Court to the court competent
to try same at Pondicherry.
B
The question which arose for consideration was
whether the court in Delhi had the jurisdiction to ·entertain
C
the complaint in the facts and circums.tances of the case
especially when issue of statutory notices was the only
reason urged by the respondent-complainant for filing a
complaint in Delhi.
Allowing the Transfer Petition, the Court
HELD: 1. Issue of a statutory notice demanding
payment of the cheque amount is not sufficient to vest
the Delhi Courts with the jurisdiction to entertain the
complaint and try the case. [Para 3) [1144-H]
D
E
2. The cheque in question was dishonoured at
Vellore where the bank on which it was drawn is located.
There is no reason why the complaint filed by the
respondents sho.uld not be transferred to Vellore for
F
further proceedings. The fact that petitioner No.2 is
suffering from several medical problems is also relevant
for deciding the transfer of the proceedings from Delhi
to Vellore. The complaint is directed to be transferred
from Courts in New Delhi to the Chief Judicial Magistrate G
at Vellore who shall try the case himself or transfer the
same to any other Court competent to try the.same.
[Paras 4 & 5] [1142-E-G]
Harman Electronics (P) Ltd. v. National Panasonic
H
1140
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2014] 6 S.C.R.
A India {P) Ltd. (2009) 1 SCC 720: 2008 (17) SCR 487 • relied
on.
Dashrath Rupsingh Rathod v. State of Maharashtra
& Anr. Criminal Appeal No.2287 of 2009; K. Bhaskaran v.
B Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan & Anr. (1999) 7 SCC 510: 1999
(3) Suppl. SCR 271 - referred to.
c
\
D
E
Case Law Reference:
2008(17)SCR 487
Relied on
1999(3)Suppl.SCR271 Reffered to
Para 3
Para 3
CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION : Transfer Petition
(Criminal)No.197 of 2012.
Petition U/S 406 of Criminal Procedure Code.
D.K. Thakur, Devendra Jha, Sushila Kumar, Debasis
Misra.for the Petitioners.
Vikram Dhokalia (for Dua Associates) for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
T.S. THAKUR, J. 1. In this petition under Section 406 of
the Cr.P.C., the petitioners seek transfer of Criminal Complaint
No.3960 of 2008 under Section 138 of the Negotiable
F Instruments Act, 1881 pending before the Metropolitan
Magistrate, Patiala House Court at New Delhi to the Court
competent to try the same at Pondicherry. The cheque in
question appears to have beeExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.