Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Legal Position on Service of Notice - The law does not require the complaint to specify the date of service of notice sent to the cheque drawer; the focus is on whether the notice was properly sent to the known address. Courts recognize that actual receipt of notice is presumed if sent via registered post unless rebutted by evidence showing non-service or deliberate avoidance. For example, in cases like 2024 0 Supreme(All) 137 and 2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1794, the courts upheld that sending notice through registered post and obtaining postal receipts or track reports sufficed to establish service, even if the notice was unclaimed or returned ["2024 0 Supreme(All) 137"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Gau) 1794"].
Sending Notice through Proper Means - Sending legal notices by speed post or registered post is generally accepted as valid service, provided the notice is sent to the correct and known address of the recipient. In Shabana Akhlakh Udhardar (Shabana Akhlak Ughradar) VS State of Gujarat - Crimes
Shabana Akhlakh Udhardar (Shabana Akhlak Ughradar) VS State of Gujarat - Crimes
"], ["2023 0 Supreme(Gau) 1542"].Timing of Notice - The notice must be issued within the statutory period (usually 30 days from the date of dishonor or knowledge) for the complaint to be valid. Courts like in 2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 45 and 2024 0 Supreme(Del) 372 have held that notices sent beyond the prescribed period render the complaint untenable, emphasizing the importance of timely dispatch ["2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 45"], ["2024 0 Supreme(Del) 372"].
Service via Third Parties or Agents - Sending notices to authorized agents or bank branches may be valid if they are authorized to receive such notices. However, improper service on unauthorized persons or at incorrect addresses can invalidate the process, as seen in DE FONSEKA v. CHARTERED BANK OF INDIA AUSTRALIA AND CHINA
DE FONSEKA v. CHARTERED BANK OF INDIA AUSTRALIA AND CHINA
"], ["2025 0 Supreme(Gau) 828"].Sending Notice through Head or Different Address - Sending a notice to a branch or head office without proper authorization or at an incorrect address may not constitute valid service. Courts have held that notices must be sent to the actual known address of the party or their authorized agent to be effective. For example, in DE FONSEKA v. CHARTERED BANK OF INDIA AUSTRALIA AND CHINA
Can Notice Be Sent to Someone Else’s Head? - Based on the legal principles and case law, sending a legal notice to a person’s head or a different address than the known or authorized address generally does not constitute valid service. Proper service requires dispatching the notice to the recipient’s actual known address or authorized agent. Sending notices to a third party or at an incorrect address does not fulfill legal requirements and may be challenged, especially if the recipient can demonstrate lack of proper service.
Legal notices under the Negotiable Instruments Act and Civil Procedure require proper dispatch to the known or authorized address of the recipient. Sending notices to a head or different address without proper authorization or knowledge generally does not constitute valid service. Courts emphasize the importance of proof of dispatch through postal receipts and the necessity of serving notices at the correct address. If a notice is sent to an incorrect or unauthorized address, it may be invalid, and the recipient can challenge the service. Therefore, sending a legal notice to someone’s head or at a different address than their known or authorized address is not legally valid unless specifically authorized or known to the sender.
In the fast-paced world of business transactions, cheque bounces can lead to swift legal action under (). But what happens when you send a legal notice demanding payment, and the recipient refuses to accept it? A common query arises: A Legal Notice Not Taking so can we Send the Notice through his Head? This essentially asks if serving the notice via the recipient's head office or other means is valid when direct delivery fails.
This blog post breaks down the rules for serving legal notices in India, focusing on , valid methods, and key court precedents. While this provides general insights, consult a qualified lawyer for advice tailored to your situation.
addresses the due to insufficient funds or other reasons. Before filing a complaint, the payee must issue a demand notice to the drawer (accused) of receiving bank intimation. The notice must demand payment . Failure to pay triggers the offence.
The critical step? Proper service of the notice. Courts emphasize that service doesn't require physical receipt by the accused. Sending it correctly fulfills your obligation. As held in various judgments, A payee can send the notice for doing his part for giving the notice. Once it is despatched his part is over and the next depends on what the sendee does. 2016 0 Supreme(Tri) 426 2015 0 Supreme(Tri) 738
Under Section 138, the notice must be sent to the correct address of the accused, typically via (RPAD). Physical handover isn't mandatory. Key points include:
If the notice reaches the correct address but the accused refuses it (e.g., marked not known or refused), courts deem it served. The postal endorsement serves as proof. In one case, the court clarified: If a legal notice is sent to the correct address and the accused fails to accept it, the law deems the notice to have been served. 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 225
This principle shifts the burden: Once you prove dispatch to the correct address, the accused must rebut non-receipt. Mere denial isn't enough; they need evidence. 2016 0 Supreme(Tri) 426
Certificate of Posting as Backup: Even a certificate of posting (without tracking) can validate service in some scenarios, strengthening your case. 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 225
Flexibility exists beyond RPAD:
Courts discourage premature (e.g., newspaper publication) without exhausting primary methods, as seen in civil suits where were set aside for non-compliance. 2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 135
In cases, dispatch completes your duty: Once it is despatched, his part is over. 2015 0 Supreme(Tri) 738
Judicial precedents reinforce :
In a cheque dishonour case, the court set aside acquittal, remanding for trial since notice proof via post was established. 2016 0 Supreme(Tri) 426
Caution from Other Contexts: In non-NI matters like notices, mechanical issuance without enquiry is quashed, underscoring the need for proper procedure. 2024 0 Supreme(Del) 75 Similarly, premature complaints without 15-day notice window fail.
Avoid these to safeguard your case:
In contempt or tenancy disputes, documented service (e.g., speed post) counters non-compliance claims. 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 1085
To maximize success:
Pro Tip: If refused at primary address, a follow-up to head office strengthens , but consult counsel first.
A refused legal notice doesn't derail your Section 138 case. via registered post to the correct address typically suffices, fulfilling your statutory duty. Courts prioritize proof of dispatch over actual receipt, as echoed in rulings: dispatch ends your role. 2020 0 Supreme(Kar) 1029 2022 0 Supreme(Telangana) 614
Key Takeaways:- Registered post = if refused. 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 225- Burden shifts to accused post-proof.- Sign and address correctly to avoid pitfalls.- Multiple methods bolster evidence.
This is general information based on precedents; laws evolve, and outcomes vary by facts. Seek professional legal advice for your matter.
References: 2020 0 Supreme(Kar) 1029 2022 0 Supreme(Telangana) 614 2021 0 Supreme(Kar) 225 2016 0 Supreme(HP) 553 2018 0 Supreme(P&H) 2285 2016 0 Supreme(Tri) 426 2015 0 Supreme(Tri) 738
2024 0 Supreme(Kar) 135 2024 0 Supreme(Del) 75 #LegalNoticeIndia #Section138 #ChequeBounce
Per contra, learned AGA has contended that it is an established legal position of law that date of service of notice sent by the complainant upon the drawer of the cheque is not required to be mentioned in the complaint and the defence whether notice has been served or not upon the drawer of the cheque ... Legal recognition of electronic records. ... Even Hon'ble Apex Court has #HL_START....
Send back the LCR. ... A payee can send the notice for doing his part for giving the notice. Once it is despatched his part is over and the next depends on what the sendee does. 23. Here the notice is returned as unclaimed and not as refused. ... The complainant filed the case taking recourse of Provision of Law of Negotiable Instruments Act, as amended upto date. ... ....
Thus, on the date when the legal notice was sent by RPAD i.e. on 14.08.2020 the respondent no.2 was not available. In such circumstances, there was no service of notice upon the respondent no.2. ... Indisputably, “giving” of notice by the complainant has come on record in the form of documents including legal notice at Exh.13, registered post AD slip at Exh.14 and track....
The said Legal Notice was sent by Speed Post. It was specifically mentioned in Paragraph-17 of the complaint that despite mentioning the last known address of the accused persons (the petitioners herein) in that said Legal Notice, the same was returned on account of the addresses being inaccurate. ... But in the present case, taking into consideration the statements made in Paragraph-17 of the complaint, ....
Bare reading of this notice shows that Executive Magistrate only picked up the language of the section and used the same in his notice. He of his own has not given any ground for taking cognizance. 6. ... It would not be proper exercise of discretion on the part of the Special Executive Magistrate to interfere with the lawful exercise of the right by a party on consideration. Legal right....
However, he did not send the legal notice within 30 days therefrom. ... the legal notice and despite the service of legal notice the accused neither replied nor complied." ... The only contention canvassed on behalf of the petitioner is that legal notice was not issued to him within the period of 30....
Instead of taking necessary steps, the plaintiffs filed an application seeking substituted service of notice through paper publication on October 23, 2013, which was allowed by the trial Court on the same day without assigning any reasons. ... The suit summons were not served on defendants 1 to 6, and hence notice to them was issued through substituted service by means of paper publication. In spite of this, they did #HL_S....
legal consequences of Section 138 of the Act.” ... notice dated 16/8/1999 (Ex.D/4C) and she did not respond. ... He is, therefore, bound to issue the legal notice which may be returned with an endorsement that the addressee is not available on the given address." 25. ... In the present case, it is not the case of anybody that notice was refused/returne....
It was also submitted that even if it was served on the Manager it was not a good service. For the appellant it was argued that a notice addressed to the Colombo branch of the Bank was a good notice as the Colombo branch should have transmitted it to its head office. ... The notice of the intended application would therefore not have been properly served on the Bank even if it was se....
After service of notice and after hearing them, if they contest after receiving notice, the trial court shall pass a fresh judgment on all issues. Send back the LCR. ... So, now the present situation is that Abdul Monnan Laskar, Hayatun Nessa and Rejaul Rezzak Laskar do not have any knowledge about institution of the suit by the sons of late Abdul Wahab Laskar, late Abdul Matin Laskar and their other legal#HL_EN....
'5. That thereafter petitioner has approached before respondent office and provide copy of the hon'ble court order and he sought appointment to the respondents but nothing has been done by the respondents. 6. The petitioner send legal notice through his lawyer, same are send to the respondents through the speed post, its submitted as its in the legal notice. It's clear willful and conscious non compliance of the judgment passed by this hon'ble court.
A payee can send the notice for doing his part for giving the notice. Once it is despatched his part is over and the next depends on what the sendee does.” It is only the mode for making such demand which the legislature has prescribed.
A payee can send the notice for doing his part for his giving the notice. For this purpose, the decision of the apex court in V. Raja Kumari versus P. Subbarama Naidu and Another reported in AIR 2005 SC 109 may be referred and the relevant part thereof may profitably be reproduced : Once it is despatched, his part is over and, the next depends on what the sendee does.
A payee can send the notice for doing his part for giving the notice. Once it is dispatched his part is over and the next depends on what the sendee does.” It is only the mode for making such demand which the legislature has prescribed.
In the year 2007, the petitioner filed Appeal No. 3 of 2007 before the Sub-Divisional Officer, Karjat and challenged the order passed by the learned Tahsildar in Tenancy Case No. 320/ 1/80. 3 to 7 but they refused to handover the possession. It is further contended that, the petitioner through his advocate send a legal notice to the respondent Nos. 3 to 7 on 02.08.2007 and claimed for possession of land but the respondents have not paid any heed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
