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

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANOJ KUMAR OHRI
Sunglo Engineering India Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Table of Content
1. complaint filed under section 138 n.i. act (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding director's liability (Para 3 , 4)
3. legal requirements for summoning under section 138 n.i. act (Para 6 , 7 , 12 , 14)
4. averments necessary for director's liability (Para 9 , 10 , 11)
5. court's decision to allow the petition and set aside order (Para 15 , 16 , 17)

JUDGMENT

Manoj Kumar Ohri, J. (Oral)--The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner assailing the order dated 30.09.2020 passed by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in Criminal Revision No. 64/2020 arising out of Complaint Case No. 3011/2019 filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as the N.I. Act) read with Section 142 N.I. Act. Vide the aforesaid order, the Revisional Court has set aside the order of summoning passed by the Trial Court qua respondent No. 2, i.e., Pranati Samal.

2. Briefly stated, the facts involved in the present case are that the petitioner filed the aforesaid complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act against M/s Samal Infra Projects Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as `the ac

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