RAKESH KAINTHLA
Mukesh Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The informant-Brijesh Kharbanda made a complaint to the police asserting that a firm was established in the name and style of MM Square by the petitioner-Mukesh Sharma and the informant-Brijesh Kharbanda on 03.12.2019. Both the partners agreed to abide by all the terms and conditions of the deed. Both the partners agreed to invest 50% amount in the business of the firm. Mukesh Sharma was empowered to purchase the land and carry out the construction and other business activities. The informant invested .1.35 Crore. The construction started in the year 2020. The petitioner was given the work of development of the project. The informant suspected that the payments were being made to un- named building material suppliers, contractors and labourers. He noticed that a large amount of cash was being withdrawn by Mukesh Sharma from the account of the firm. He visited the project site and found that minimum work was carried out by the petitioner. He could not find account books and other relevant documents. He requisitioned books of account and balance sheets of the firm but his request was not considered by the petitioner. He deputed Charan Singh Arora to super
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.