Retirement from an unregistered partnership does not absolve liability for debts incurred prior to retirement when debts are not legally assigned.

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the complaint in S.T.C.No.104 of 2021 on the file of Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Tiruchengode.

2. Heard both sides.

3. The case of the respondent is that he is a proprietor conducting textile business of manufacturing stock and sale of hosiery yarn and production of clothing in the name and style of “Kulandaivel Textiles” and the petitioner as well as accused 3 and 4 are partners and conducting partnership business in the name and style of “Ragam Texitles”, who is A1 in the alleged complaint. The accused 3 and 4 purchased cloths on credit basis from the respondent/complainant herein. As per the ledger account and invoice bill, accused 3 and 4 are liable to pay a sum of Rs.9,23,859/- to the respondent, since they are recognised as authorised signatories of A1 partnership business. But, they failed to repay the amount, however, they have issued a cheque for a sum of Rs.8,96,025/-, but the same was returned as insufficient funds from the bank. Thereafter, he has issued a legal notice dated 27.01.2022 to them. Subsequently, the respondent preferred a complaint under Sec.200 of Cr.P.C. for the offence under Sec.138 of Negotiable Instruments Act in S.T.C.No.104 of 2021 before the Judicial Magistrate Fast Track Court, Tiruchengode, in which, the petitioner is ranked as A2 and her husband is ranked as A3. Now, to quash the said complaint, the 2nd accused preferred this Criminal Original Petition.

4. The learned counsel for petitioner would submit that she has already retired from the partnership firm on 01.04.2018 itself. Thereafter, the alleged transaction was happened and the cheque was issued only in the year of 2020. Therefore, there is no legal enforceable liability on the petitioner, since she retired from the firm on 01.04.2018 onwards by executing the deed of Retirement. Hence, she prayed to quash the proceedings initiated against her.

5. The learned counsel for 2nd respondent/defacto complainant would submit that the deed of partnership is an unregistered one, besides trial was begun and P.W.1 was also examined. Hence, he prayed to dismiss this petition.

6. On seeing the documents and materials relied on by the 2nd respondent/defacto complainant starts from the year of 2020. However, the respondent issued notice demanding to repay the amount for purchase of cloths on credit basis, for which accused 3 and 4 issued a cheque and the same was returned by the bank as insufficient funds. Therefore, it needs detailed trial and at this stage, she cannot be exonerated as there is no liability on her. Hence, this Petition is liable to be dismissed. If at all, any defence available for the petitioner, she is entitled to raise the same before the trial court. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed as no merit. Consequently, connected Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.

07.03.2024 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No rpp T.V.THAMILSELVI, J.

rpp

07.03.2024