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

2006 Supreme(Del) 22

CITY PALACE ELECTRONICS – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


J. P. SINGH, J.

( 1 ) THESE petitions have been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the summoning order dated 16. 11. 2004 passed by Metropolitan Magistrate, Delhi and for quashing of the complaint and the proceedings emanating therefrom. I have heard Mr. Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Siddharth Luthra, learned counsel for respondent and have gone through the impugned order as also copies of the documents placed on the file.

( 2 ) BRIEFLY the facts are that M/s. Sony India Pvt. Ltd. filed a complaint under Section 138 read with Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against M/s. City Palace Electronics Pvt. Ltd. and its Directors S. Shri Vijay kumar Chabra, Dinesh Kumar Chabra and Rajinder Kumar Chabra. It is alleged in the complaint that accused No. 1 is a multi-brand dealer and was one of several hundred authorized dealers of the complainant. Complainant supplied its Sony and AIWA products to accused No. 1 and four running accounts were maintained. The account of Sony branded products was settled till 19. 6. 2004 when a sum of rs. 8,16,935/- was credited to the account of the accused towards obsolete


















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