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

2022 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 89650

MADRAS HIGH COURT
P.DINESH KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
T.CIBI CHAKARAVARTHY – Respondent
CRL OP 11335/2019



Advocates:
['M/S S SENTHIL', '', 'R VIVEK', 'M PREM KUMAR', 'S LAKSHMIKANTH', 'D VAIRAMOORTHY', 'J KARUPPIAH', 'R ANBUKARASU', 'COURT NOTICE SERVED ON RESPONDENT', '', 'T CIBI CHAKARAVARTHY S/O TENZING', 'PROPRIETOR OF TCS TRADE LINKS', 'NO A S PETTAI', 'NAMAKKAL TALUK', 'NAMAKKAL DISTRICT']

Crl.O.P.No.11335 of 2019

and

Crl.M.P.No.5778 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Reserved on :28.10.2022

Pronounced on

:03.11.2022

Coram:

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN

Crl.O.P.No.11335 of 2019

and

Crl.M.P.No.5778 of 2019

P.Dinesh Kumar

.. Petitioner/Accused No.2

/versus/

T.Cibi Chakaravarthy,

S/o Tenzing,

Proprietor of TCS Trade Links,

No.38-1 A.S. Pettai,

Namakkal Taluk,

Namakkal District.

.. Respondent/complainant

Prayer:

Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of

Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.131 of 2018 pending before the

Judicial Magistrate No.I, Namakkal, Namakkal District and quash the same.

For Petitioner

:Mr.R.Anbukarasu

Page No.1/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.11335 of 2019

and

Crl.M.P.No.5778 of 2019

For Respondent

:No appearance

O R D E R

This Criminal Original Petition is filed by the second accused, who

faces criminal prosecution for the offence under Section 138 of the

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 in connection with cheque dated

24.02.2017 drawn in favour of the complainant for Rs.15,81,813/- signed

and issued on behalf of the first accused as Managing Partner of the

Partnership Firm by name “ M/s Sri Lakshmi Feeds”.

2.

The case of the complainant is that, he is running a business in

the name and style of “TCS Trade Links” dealing with raw materials

namely, Soya-Doc-Dc Oiled rice bran and rice bran oil. The first accused

Partnership Firm “M/s Sri Lakshmi Feeds”, represented by its Managing

Partner, the second accused (the petitioner herein) used to purchase raw

materials like soya-doc DC oiled rice bran and rice bran oil on credit basis

from the complainant. The subject cheque was issued to discharge the due

Page No.2/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.11335 of 2019

and

Crl.M.P.No.5778 of 2019

payable towards the cost of raw materials for poultry feed sold. On

presentation of the cheque dated 24.02.2017, it was returned with memo

dated 05/04/2017 as “Account Blocked”. Statutory Notice to the accused

was sent through the Lawyer on 04/05/2017. The said notice returned on

06/05/2017 as 'unserved'. The complaint therefore filed under Section 138 of

the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 on 08/09/2017 with explaining the

reason for not filing the complaint within 30 days from the date of cause of

action, which is 21/05/2017. The complaint was taken on file by the Judicial

Magistrate No.1, Namakkal in C.C.No.131/2018 and summons issued to the

accused persons.

3.

On receipt of the summons, the petition to quash is filed on the

ground that, the Partnership Firm “M/s Sri Lakshmi Feeds” was

incorporated consisting of Balasubramaniam, Babu Saravanan,

S.P.Kumaravel, K.Ramesh, Kanagaraj and P.Dineshkumar. The firm was

registered in No:935/2014 before the Registrar of Firms on 01/11/2014. One

Page No.3/12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Crl.O.P.No.11335 of 2019

and

Crl.M.P.No.5778 of 2019

Mr.C.Periyasamy, was inducted into the Partnership Firm on 31/08/2015.

Subsequently, on 01/09/2015, except Periyasamy and his son Dinesh Kumar

rest of the Partners retired from the Firm. Till 11/03/2017 the Firm was run

by its partners Periyasamy and Dinesh Kumar. After that date, the firm was

reconstituted, Savitha and her husband Chetan kumar were induced as

partners, Periyasamy and Dinesh kumar were retired. The creditors of the

firm were informed about the retirement deed dated 15/03/2017 and the

reconstitution deed dated 16/03/2017, wherein it has been agreed by the

parties that all the assets and liabilities of the firm henceforth be taken over

by the new partners namely, Savitha and Chetan kumar. The complainant

Cibi Chakravarthy, who is one of the witnesses to the deeds of retirement

and reconstitution know about this fact.

4.

As per the Form-A submitted to the Registrar of Firms on

23/03/2017, the date of reconstitution is ment

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 Back to top