Back
GUJARAT HIGH COURT
HITESHKUMAR PULIN GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
PRAKASHBAHI PRAJAPATI – Respondent
ORAL
JUDGMENT
1. Present appeal is under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging judgment and order dated 22.12.2016 passed by the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kalol, in Criminal Case No.2525 of 2015. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate proceeded to record the acquittal of the present respondent – original accused thereby dismissing the complaint preferred by the present appellant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
2. Brief facts of the complaint as contended by the original complainant is that :
2.1 The complainant – Hiteshkumar Pulin Gupta claims to be a partner of M/s. Ramanand Plastics. It is the case of the complainant that said the partnership firm is engaged in the business of selling woven fabrics and had come in contact with the respondent – accused M/s. Jerum Plastics, who is represented through his authorized person Mr. Prakash Prajapati.
2.2 According to the complainant, the respondent – accused had purchased the goods worth Rs.2,59,29,527/- and till 12.08.2014 had paid an amount of Rs. 2,40,50,000/-. Thus, the outstanding amount of Rs.32,99,415/- with inter
A partner of an unregistered partnership cannot file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without express authority, as per Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act.
An unregistered partnership firm can file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as Section 69(2) of the Indian Partnership Act does not bar such filings.
Proper authorization and knowledge of the transaction are essential for filing a complaint on behalf of a company. The trial should determine issues related to the competence of the complainant and t....
There is a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act that there exists a legally enforceable debt or liability.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a complaint filed without proper authorization and the failure to include the partnership firm as a co-accused renders the complaint not maint....
Dishonour of cheque – In absence of partnership firm being arraigned as an accused, both complaint petitions against partner of firm were not maintainable.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
