Back
BOMBAY HIGH COURT
G. A. Sanap, J
Ramdeobaba Developers and Builders through its Partner Harikisan Vithaldasji Chandak – Appellant
Versus
Syed Mazaruddin Syed Shabuddin (Since dead, through his Lrs) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. amendment to clarify vicarious liability. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. opposition to the amendment on grounds of maintainability. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. arguments addressing the necessity and impact of the amendment. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. legal precedents regarding amendment of complaints. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. judgment affirming the amendment as a valid correction. (Para 19 , 20 , 22 , 26) |
| 6. final ruling dismissing the application. (Para 30) |
1. In this criminal application, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , challenge is to the order dated 20.04.2013 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Darwha, whereby learned Magistrate allowed the application (Exh.75) in Cri. Complaint Case No. 1272 of 2007, made by the complainants seeking amendment to the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as “the N.I. Act” for short).
2. The facts relevant for the decision of this application may be stated thus :
The applicants are the accused and the non-applicants are the complainants. They would be referred by their nomenclature in the complaint. The original complainant was Syed Mazarudd
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
