HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1258 of 2009 DATE:09.03.2010 Between: M/s. Rama Priyadarsini Finance & Chit Funds (P) Ltd., represented by its Manager, Koritepadu, Guntur. … Appellant And Nallapati Sivaiah and another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1258 of 2009 JUDGMENT: This appeal is directed against the judgment, dated 26.03.2009, in C.C.No.1069 of 2007 passed by the learned V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the appellant- complainant filed C.C.No.1069 of 2007 on the file of the V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, against the 1st respondent herein for the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Subsequently, as the complainant was called absent and there was no representation on his behalf when the matter was taken up for hearing at 1.45 p.m. on 26.03.2009, the court below dismissed the complaint, by judgment, dated 26.03.2009, and acquitted the 1st respondent-accused under Section 256 Cr.P.C. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant-complainant has submitted that the appellant-complainant and his counsel were present before the court below at the time of call work at 10.30 a.m. on 26.03.2009, but the learned Magistrate passed over the matter till completion of miscellaneous work. Hence, the learned counsel for the complainant went to another court and by the time he attended the court below, the learned Magistrate called the matter and dismissed the complaint on the ground that the complainant was called absent and there was no representation on his behalf. Therefore, he prays to allow the appeal. 4. When the complainant and his counsel were called absent at the time of hearing the matter, the court below, instead of dismissing the complaint, should have adjourned the matter giving an opportunity of hearing to the complainant. In the light of the same and as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant-complainant appears to be reasonable and having regard to the fact that the complaint was filed against the 1st respondent-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, this Court is of the view that the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside. 5. In the result, the appeal is allowed and the judgment dated 26.03.2009 passed by the learned V Additional Junior Civil Judge, Guntur, in C.C.No.1069 of 2007, is set aside and the complaint is restored to file. ______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 9th March, 2010 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1258 of 2009 (Allowed) Date:09-03-2010 CBS