MOOL CHAND GARG, J.

1. The appellant in this matter is aggrieved by the order passed by a Learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 16.03.2006 whereby, he dismissed the complaint filed by the appellant, by holding that the complaint filed by the appellant in his personal capacity cannot be treated as a complaint by M/s. Jiya Lal Sumair Chand Jain, the payee of the cheques in question. The relevant portion of the order subject matter of the appeal is reproduced for the sake of the understanding the matter. 9. I have heard the arguments of both the parties and perused their written as well as oral submissions. The perusal of the cheques Ex.CW1/2 and Ex. CW1/3 shows that the cheques have been issued by the accused no.1 in favour of M/s. Jiya Lal Sumair Chand Jain and the same were presented for encashment to the banker of the firm and returned back unpaid vide Debit Advise Ex.CW2/1 and Ex.CW2/2. The document Ex.CW1/1 relied upon by the complainant during the examination of the CW1 shows that M/s. Jiya Lal Sumair Chand Jain is the partnership firm and the cheques were issued in its favour and the partner of the firm has authorized the manager (account) of the firm to initiate legal proceed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document