Dhanamjai Nidhi Ltd vs Bindhu V G — 2249/2025

Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section Sec 138 and 142. Status: Not in the list. Next hearing: 19th August 2026.

Crl.MP - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETN.

CNR: KLTV360022292025

Not in the list

Next Hearing

19th August 2026

Filing Number

2249/2025

Filing Date

03-07-2025

Registration No

2249/2025

Registration Date

04-07-2025

Court

Judicial First class Magistrate Court 2 Nedumangadu

Judge

1-JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II NEDUMANGAD

Acts & Sections

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT Section Sec 138 and 142
Crl.MP/2250/2025 Classification : Section Dhanamjai Nidhi Ltd

Petitioner(s)

Dhanamjai Nidhi Ltd

Adv. LEKSHMI GIREESH

Respondent(s)

Bindhu V G

Hearing History

Judge: 1-JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II NEDUMANGAD

12-03-2026

Not in the list

27-02-2026

Appearance Of Parties

10-12-2025

Return of notice

19-09-2025

Return of notice

04-07-2025

Issue notice to respondent. For return of Notice.

Interim Orders

27-02-2026
Order

Summary: The petition for condonation of delay in filing a cheque dishonor complaint (under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act) was allowed. The court accepted the complainant's explanation that the delay resulted from bona fide administrative reasons—specifically, misplacement of cheques during office furniture rearrangement—and found the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional. The accused did not file any objection despite being served notice, and the court determined that refusing condonation would cause irreparable prejudice to the complainant while no prejudice was shown to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The petition for condonation of delay in filing a cheque dishonor complaint (under Section 138 read with 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act) was allowed. The court accepted the complainant's explanation that the delay resulted from bona fide administrative reasons—specifically, misplacement of cheques during office furniture rearrangement—and found the delay was neither deliberate nor intentional. The accused did not file any objection despite being served notice, and the court determined that refusing condonation would cause irreparable prejudice to the complainant while no prejudice was shown to the accused. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

Judicial First class Magistrate Court 2 Nedumangadu All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case