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

2006 Supreme(Pat) 1013

SHEEMA ALI KHAN
K. Mahender – Appellant
Versus
State Of Bihar – Respondent


Judgment

1. Heard Mr. Chittaranjan Sinha, Senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners. No one appears on behalf of the Opposite Party no.2.

2. The petitioner no.1 is the Vice President of Nicholas Piramal Tower limited (hereinafter referred to as the Company) having its office at Mumbai. The petitioner no.2 is the Chairman of the said company. The complainant Pashupatinath Khemka is the partner of M/s J.R. Distributors. He has lodged a complaint petition on 27.9.2005 in which he has stated that his company was appointed as a distributor by Nicholas Piramal Limited and the parties had entered into agreement for this purpose.

3. The main allegation in the complaint petition is that the Mumbai Company had enticed the complainant to accept the distributorship of Nicholas Piramal. It has further been alleged that the petitioners had invoked bank guarantee of ten lakhs and on that basis of these facts the case has been made out under Sections 406, 120 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code. It has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that there are certain facts and documents which would show that in fact no offence under Section 420 or 406 of the IPC has been made out in the c












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