Composite notice for dishonour of cheque whether legal?
There is no legal impediment in sending a combined notice. A notice may contain descripttion of different cheques with specific dates, amounts and number. A combined notice, ifsofacto is not illegal. The question is when by such notice, a demand is made in respect of a cheque after the statutory period of 30 days from the date of receiving of the information about the dishonour of the cheque from the Bank, what would be the status of such a notice.
In such a case, in my humble estimate, the notice of the cheque which is well within the period of 30 days as envisaged in Clause (b) of Section 138 of the N. I. Act, is to be given effect to. The learned Trial Court also has come to such a conclusion and, in fact, that view of the learned Trial Court has not been challenged. Consolidated demand notice would not invalidate the same in such a case. Mr. Nayak, learned Counsel for the respondent has referred to the following decisions in support of his contention. a) K. R. Indira Vs. Dr. G. Adinarayan a, reported in A.I.R. 2003 SC 4689;
b) Rahul Builders Vs. Arihant Fertilizers & /Chemicals & Anr., reported in (2008) 2 SCC 321.
In K. R. Indira (Supra), the Hon'ble Court was pleased to hold that consolidated demand notice could not invalidate the same. But there should be specific demand made for payment of the amount covered by the cheque. In case specific demand for each cheque is not made separately and distinctly, the consolidated notice cannot be said to be in accordance with law and notice becomes invalidate resulting in acquittal of the accused.
In Rahul Builders (Supra), it was held that an omnibus notice without specifying as to what was the amount due under the dishonoured cheque would not sub-serve the requirement of law. There is no dispute as to the principles laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court mentioned above. In the instant case, the factual aspects are quite different. The notice, which was marked Ext.5 categorically, indicates that the two cheques were specifically mentioned in the notice with date and amount distinctly. Therefore, this notice cannot be said to be an omnibus nature of notice or a notice wherein demand has not been made specifically. It is true that one notice was not in conformity with Clause (b) of Section 138 of the N. I. Act because the information of dishonour of the cheque was received more than a period of 30 days from the date of issuing notice. That fact does not necessarily invalidates the notice in respect of the second cheque mentioned specifically with date and amount in the notice. The same was within the period as specified in Clause (b) of Section 138 of the Act. Therefore, in my opinion, the view of the learned Court in this regard appears to be correct.1
Kolkata High Court (Appellete Side)
Nikhil Chandra Mitra vs The State Of West Bengal & Anr on 27 July, 2012
Citation; 2013 ALL M R (cri)JOURNAL269https://www.lawweb.in/2013/12/composite-notice-for-dishonour-of.html
