2008(2) Bankmann 371 (Del.).
DELHI HIGH COURT
Pradeep Nandrajog, J.
Polar Industries Ltd. and
Another —Petitioners
versus
Ruchi Strips and Alloys Ltd. and
Another —Respondents
Cri. M(M) No. 3578/2002, Crl. M(M) No. 3580/2002
Decided on 20.9.2007
Counsel for the Parties:
For the petitioner.:Mr. Vijay K. Gupta, Advocate.
For the respondents:Mr. G. L. Rawal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Kuljeet Rawal, Advocate.
Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Sections 138, 141—Quashment of complaint—Disputed questions of fact involved—Evidence required to be led—Impermissible for the High Court to quash the complaint in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Paras 17, 18)
Result: Petition dismissed.
Pradeep Nandrajog, J. —M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd., respondent had admittedly entered into a business transaction with Polar Industries Ltd. It is also not in dispute that between 10.1.1996 and 27.1.1996 various invoices were raised totalling Rs. 18,22,654. As per Polar Industries Ltd. the invoices were cleared for payment by Polar Industries Ltd. in sum of Rs. 10,03,244.
2. According to M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. amount payable is as per invoices raised i.e. Rs. 18,22,654.
3. On 24.2.1996, 18.3.1996 and 20.3.1996, 3 cheques were admittedly issued by Polar Industries to M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. in sum of Rs. 5,42, 100, Rs. 3,41,629, and Rs. 3,22,661 towards part payment of the amount payable under the invoices.
4. It is not in dispute that when presented for encashment, all 3 cheques were returned dishonoured by the banker of Polar Industries.
5. 3 complaints were filed under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. Each pertaining to one cheque issued by Polar Industries.
6. Pertaining to the complaint which related to the cheque in sum of Rs. 3,41,629 being Complaint No. 1440/1996 an order came to be passed on 27.1.2000 by the M.M. recording that pursuant to a compromise between the parties 5 cheques issued by Polar Industries in favour of M/s Ruchi Strips and Alloys Ltd. being encashed, M/s Ruchi Strips and Alloys Ltd was agreeable for withdrawal of the case.
7. Thus, complaint case No.1440/1996 was disposed of as settled between the parties.
8. Pertaining to the two other complaints relating to the cheque in sum of Rs. 5,42,100 and Rs. 3,22,661, Polar Industries started asserting that an all embracing settlement has been arrived at between the parties. That to clear liability in sum of Rs. 18,03,244, being the value of the invoices as admitted to be payable by Polar Industries, M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. had issued 11 cheques detailed as under:
Cheque No. Date Amount
888491 28.11.1996 2,00,000
195687 31.01.1997 1,00,000
001100 17.04.1997 1,58,271
001098 27.04.1997 3,41,629
744979 22.06.1997 2,00,000
074834DD 17.06.1998 2,06,490
042371 10.09.1999 1,19,370
040372 10.10.1999 1,19,370
040373 10.11.1999 1,19,370
040374 10.12.1999 1,19,370
040375 10.01.2000 1,19,370
18,03,244
9. According to the petitioner, M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. was thus bound to withdraw the complaints pertaining to cheque in sum of Rs. 5,42,100 as also cheque in sum of Rs. 3,22,661. According to the petitioner since M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. did not agree to withdraw the said two complaints, only remedy available was to seek quashing of the said 2 complaints for the reason civil dispute pertaining to the cheques being settled, the complaints could not be proceeded ahead.
10. Question which arises for consideration is, whether by receiving the 11 cheques noted in para 8 above, M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. consented to a settlement of all claims pertaining to the 3 cheques issued by Polar Industries in sum of Rs. 3,41,629, Rs. 5,42,100 and Rs. 3,22,661.
11. Admittedly, there is no written document evidencing the settlement if any between the parties.
12. It is urged by learned counsel for the petitioners that the value of the 11 cheques noted in para 8 above equals to the liability admitted by the petitioner pursuant to the 6 invoices raised on it by M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. and thus, there exists sufficient evidence wherefrom it can be safely inferred that by receiving the 11 cheques and on encashment of the 11 cheques an all embracing settlement between the parties was not only arrived at but even satisfied.
13. Per contra, learned counsel for
M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. submits that as per the invoices, on delayed payment, M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd. was entitled to interest @ 24% per annum. Learned counsel submits that out of 11 cheques (detailed in para 8 above) received by M/s. Ruchi Strips & Alloys Ltd., 5 cheques in sum of As. 1,19,370 each were recei