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

2019 Supreme(Mad) 3333

N.ANAND VENKATESH
V. RAJESHWARI – Appellant
Versus
RAMESH – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel for Appearing Parties
Mr. V.V. Sairam, Advocate, for the Appellant; Mr. V.S. Sivasundaram , Advocate, for the Respondent

ORDER

N. Anand Venkatesh, J. - This petition has been filed seeking to call for the records on the file of Judicial Magistrate No.I, Villupuram in C.C.No.550 of 2012 and quash the proceedings.

2. An interesting issue has come up for consideration before this Court. The question involved in this case is whether an unregistered Partnership Firm can also be brought within the purview of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and in such cases whether the Partnership Firm must be made as an accused along with the other partners, in order to maintain a complaint for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ?

3. The brief facts of the case are that the respondent has filed a complaint against the petitioners for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act on the ground that he was a partner in the firm named as 'Laxmi Agencies' and he was compelled to retire from the Partnership Firm. There were certain amounts due and payable to the respondent and towards the discharge of the said liability, the accused persons namely the petitioners issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.3,00,000/-(Rupees three lakhs only). The said cheque was dishonored on the gr

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