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

2003 Supreme(Cal) 503

P.K.BISWAS
APURBA KUMAR NANDY – Appellant
Versus
TIRTHANKAR GANGULY – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
D.Adhikary, MANJULA CHAUDHARY, S.BANERJEE, Saswata Gopal Mukherjee

PRADIP KUMAR BISWAS, J.

( 1 ) 1. By filing this application under section 401 read with section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, one Sri Apurba Kumar nandy, petitioner herein, has come up before this Court seeking for quashing of the proceeding being Case No. 1091-C of 2000 under section 420 of the Indian penal Code now pending before the Id. Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Howrah.

( 2 ) THE short facts leading to the filing of this application are as under.

( 3 ) THE present petitioner is the proprietor of M/s. Narayan Engineering construction. It has been alleged by the petitioner that the above complaint case under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code was filed before the Court of the Id. Chief Judicial Magistrate at Howrah alleging therein that the complainant company namely M/s. Quality Engineering (Baroda) Pvt. Ltd. has supplied the well power and remote control etc. to one M/s. Tools and Abrasives centre and as per the request of the complainant, the Tools and Abrasives centre delivered two pieces of well power 4400 Amps. , whose prices were Rs. 62,400/- including the sales-tax and two pieces of Remote Control, whose prices were Rs. 2,750/- each on 15th day of May, 199





























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