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

PARAMJEET SINGH
Kamdhenu Ispat Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
V. V. K. Agencies – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Sudhir Aggarwal, Advocate

JUDGMENT (ORAL)

Paramjeet Singh, J. — Having heard learned counsel for the applicant-petitioner and for the reasons mentioned in application, delay of 141 days in filing the instant revision is condoned.

2. Application stands allowed.

3. Instant criminal revision has been preferred by the petitioner against judgment dated 05.02.2013 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Gurgaon thereby dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 25.08.2012 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Gurgaon vide which petitioner has been acquitted in a complaint case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short ‘N.I.Act’).

4. Brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed by the complainant alleging that the complainant, a registered company under the Companies Act, is manufacturer of TMT Bars, Paints, Wallputty etc. and Sh. Vipul Sharma is duly authorized to institute and prosecute the cases on its behalf. The accused had been purchasing paints and other goods from the complainant since 2008 and had been making part payments. A sum of Rs.3,85,404/- was outstanding against the accused on 18.05.2010 and for payment of that outstanding liabilit












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