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

S.C.PARIJA
Prakiti Enterprisers – Appellant
Versus
Super Health Care – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioners:M/s. Goutam Kumar Acharya M/s. Subash Ch. Hota, S.K.Behera, R.Nayak & D.Naik, Advocates

JUDGMENT

S.C. Parija, J.—This writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for quashing of the Complaint Case No.31064 of 2013, pending in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Chandigarh, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. The case of the petitioners is that the petitioner no.1 is a proprietorship firm dealing in pharmaceutical products and in course of business, it was appointed as the super distributor of opposite party. On being appointed as the super distributor, the petitioner No.1 firm issued three cheques in favour of the opposite party as security, without bearing any dates and amount, drawn on State Bank of India, Tulashipur Branch, Cuttack (Orissa). While issuing the said three cheques, the petitioner no.1 firm had intimated the opposite party that the cheques have been issued towards security. It is the case of the petitioners that subsequently, as the opposite party did not extend any support to the petitioner no.1 firm, it was not able to market the pharmaceutical products which had been received from the opposite party. Inspite of complaint, as no effective steps were taken by the opposite party to support
































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