23,26,27,28,41,46,56,59,61,69 & 71 % 13.09.2010 Present: Mr. V.K. Shailendra for the petitioners. -1- CRIMINAL REVISION PETITIOIN NOS. 496/2010, 499/2010, 500/2010, 501/2010, 514/2010, 519/2010, 529/2010, 532/2010 1 534/2010, 542/2010 & 544/2010 1. These revision petitions .are directed against the order dated 1 8th May, 20] 0 refusing to take cognizance and summon the accused in complaints filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (the Aët, for short). By the impugned order dated 18th May, 2010, learned trial court has dismissed the complaints, inter alia, holding that no proof of delivery of notice under Section 138(b) of the Act has been placed on record. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner had filed postal receipts • fice for .sending of notices. under Section 138 proviso issued by the post of clause (b) of the Act. He relies upon the Evidence Act, 1872 and the General Clauses Act, 1897. He has also placed reliance on several judgments of the Supreme Court including V. Raja Kumzri versus P. Subbarama Naidu, (O04) 8 SCC 774 and D. Vinod Sliivappa versus IVanda Beiliappa, (2006) 6 SCC 456. He submits that the question of service of notice was not argued and questioned. He submits that if the question of service of notice had been raised by the learned trial court, he would have referred to and relied upon the aforesaid judgments and Section .114 ofthe Evidence Act, 1872 and Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897. He has drawn my attention to earlier order passed by thi Court in Criminal Revision Petition No. 452/2010 and other connected cases on .30t11 August, 2010. Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified In view of the aforesaid position, the impugned order dated 8 May, 2010 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded back to the learned trial c.ourt for fresh hearing and decision. Learned counsel for the petitioner will be entitled to rely upon judgments and statutory provisions in support of his c9ntention. . It is clarified that this Courthas not eçpressed any opinion on merits and the trial, court will pass an order without being influenced by the observations made if this order. . 4 The petitioner will appear before the trial court on 5" October, 2010. The petitions are accordingly disposed of. ' -1z - , // L- SANJIV KHANNA, J. • • SEPTEMBER 13 9 2010 VKR