Dishonour of Cheque

Mr.Venkat

"Unclaimed" here means that the addressee is made aware of the notice, and inspite of the fact that the postal department wanted to serve the noitce or gave intmation that such a notice was received by the addressee, the later failing to takedelivery of the noitce and it is presumed that the addressee has "refused" the notice. The presumption has to be rebutted by the addressee by cogent and convincing evidence.

Court notice can never be said as the requisite notice since the law says that the notice has to served before launching the prosecution.

 Unclaimed notice is also amounts to valid service.  It gives a presumption that addresse is well aware of the contents of the notice.

IN A PROCEDING U/S 138 NI ACT IT INOT NECESSARY THAT THE ACCUSED MUST RECEIVED THE NOTICE. IF U CAN PROVED THAT U SEND A NOTICE GIVING HIM 15 DAYS FOR REPAYMENT IS ENOUGH TO DROW A PROCEDING U/S138 NI ACT

If the notice returns unclaimed then in such cases, the supreme court the three member bench headed by CJpresent has stated the complainant takes 2 options runnning the risk of being rebutted by invoking the deemed service or can present the cheque once again and re-issue the notice.  The question if rebutted in the trial the accused gets a Honourable acquital of the non complaiance of the mandatory 138 provisions.  Once the trial is over only hopeis to prefer an appeal against acquital to High Court