M. NAGAPRASANNA
Heena Thirumali Sateesh – Appellant
Versus
Minimelt Engineers India, Rep. By Its Proprietor Sri K. Manickam – Respondent
ORDER :
The petitioners are before this Court calling in question proceedings in C.C.No.8836/2021, pending before the XX Additional S.C.J. and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (SCCH-22), Bengaluru, registered for the offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short ‘the N.I. Act’). The petitioners are accused Nos.3 and 4 in the said proceedings.
2. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar I.S., learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ajay R.A., learned counsel for the respondent.
3. The facts adumbrated are as follows:
The petitioners are directors of Hoysala Projects Private Limited (for short ‘the Company’). The respondent is the complainant. The respondent and the Company entered into certain transaction, in furtherance of which, the authorised signatory of the Company issues certain cheques in favour of the respondent complainant. The cheques, when presented for its realisation, were returned for want of sufficient funds, which leads the complainant to take recourse to legal proceedings against the Company and the office bearers, who are the petitioners herein the others. A complaint comes to be registered before the concerned Court invoking Section 200 of the
S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd Vs. Neeta Bhalla & Another
National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. Harmeet Singh Paintal
Assistant Commissioner, Assessment-II, Bangalore v. Velliappa Textiles Ltd.
Sabhitha Ramamurthy v. RBS Channabasavaradhya
S.K. Alagh v. State of Uttar Pradesh
Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. v. Datar Switchgear Ltd.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.