Supreme Court: Cheque notice received by family member is valid service

The case concerns a criminal appeal challenging the Kerala High Court's decision to set aside a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, specifically regarding whether a statutory demand notice served on the accused's mother at his correct address constitutes valid service.

Who it concerns: Appellant: Sainaba; Respondents: State of Kerala & Anr. (Respondent No.2 is the accused/drawer); Bench: Justice Manmohan.

What the court decided

• The Court held that the impugned judgment of the High Court warrants interference.
• The Court affirmed that dispatch of a notice by registered post to the correct address of the drawer raises a presumption of due service under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act, 1897.
• The Court noted that the High Court acted in excess of its revisional jurisdiction by re-appreciating evidence and substituting its own view for the concurrent findings of the Trial and Appellate Courts.
• The Court stated that the High Court's reasoning reduces the efficacy of Section 138 by allowing drawers to escape liability if notices are received by family members.

Also in the document

• The judgment is marked as 'REPORTABLE'.
• The Court noted that despite due service of the notice in the Supreme Court, there was no appearance on behalf of Respondent No.2, leading the Court to proceed with the hearing.
• The Court cited precedents such as K. Bhaskaran vs. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan & Anr. to support the principle that service is deemed effected unless the sendee proves non-service was not attributable to them.