SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(AP) 82

ELLEN DHARKAR, R.M.BAPAT
Mr. Amit Desai – Appellant
Versus
Shine Enterprises – Respondent


RAMESH MADHAV BAPAT, J.

( 1 ) ON a reference made by the learned single Judge for placing the matter before the appropriate bench, this matter is posted before this Bench.

( 2 ) THE petitioners herein were the accused in C. C. No. 88/97 filed by the complainant-first respondent herein in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Madanapalle, Chittoor District. The present petition has been filed by the accused-petitioners herein for quashing the same under Section 482, Cr. P. C.

( 3 ) THE complainant had made the following averments in his complaint. It was averred by the complainant that the complainant is doing business in Madanapalle Town under the name and style of M/s. Shine Enterprises. It is a partnership firm. It is the further case of the complainant that the complainant had commercial dealing with the accused. They were purchasing non-alcoholic beverage drink called "pepup" black label since 1996. They had deposited a sum of Rs. 10,000. 00 as a caution deposit with the accused.

( 4 ) IT is the further case of the complainant that they were local distributors at Madanapalle. The first stock purchased by them was sold successfully. They placed on order of second













Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top