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

1984 Supreme(Del) 162

H.L.ANAND
VIJAY KHANNA – Appellant
Versus
JUMBO ELECTRONICS COMPANY LIMITED – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
BASUDEV PRASAD, LALIT BHARDWAJ, N.B.SINHA, RAJ PANJWANI

H. L. ANAND, J.

( 1 ) BY this petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, Vijay Khanna, petitioner, challenges proceedings in complaint case No. 311-0, filed by Jumbo Electronics Co. Ltd. , respondent No. 1 herein, for alleged offences under Sections 42014651468 and 471 Indian Penal Code. against the petitioner, and pending in the Court below, as well as the order made by the Court below, on June 4, 1983. by which the court issued the process against the petitioner. By the said order the Court also directed that an intimation be sent about the pendency of the case to the Passport Officer concerned, informing the said officer that the presence of the petitioner was required in the Court in connection with the case.

( 2 ) ACCORDING to the complaint, a copy of which is enclosed as Annexure-I to the petition, Jumbo Electronics Co. Ltd. , the respondent, carries on business in London in Video Cassettes and other electronics goods, and Pranab Kumar Banerjee, though whom the complaint is filed, is the company s repre sentative at New Delhi, who functions under a senior officer of the. Company, Vinod Bajaj, from A-464, Defence Colony, in New Delhi. The Company has a telephone no. 6






























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