AJAY Vs. RADHE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nobody appears for the respondents despite service and filing of Vakalatnama. This is an interesting matter in which two cheques were issued in the name of one Balkrishna Rathi, who is no more. After his death, his wife Smt. Radhabai has filed a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act against the present petitioner on the allegations that present petitioner was the drawer of cheques, which were dishonoured on presentation, but despite notice, the petitioner is not making payment towards the dishonoured cheques. In the complaint itself it has been mentioned by complainant Smt. Radhabai that cheques were drawn in the name of Balkrishna Rathi. His son has prosecuted the complaint, but who is also no more. Other Legal Representatives have been arrayed in the complaint and the case is at the stage of evidence, however, no evidence has been recorded.

(2.) Grievance of the petitioner is that the complaint so filed should not have been entertained and in fact no cognizance should have been taken, in as much as once the person in whose favour the cheques were issued is no more. In similar case efforts were made to launch prosecution on the basis of dishonoured cheques issued in favour of dead party and a complaint was filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This Court in the case of Kishore Goyal Vs. Hanif Patel, 2010 2 MPHT 426, has made the following observations:--