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

MADRAS HIGH COURT
R. SUMATHI(A – Appellant
Versus
SRI BALAJI YARNS – Respondent
CRL OP 27705/2015



Advocates:
['M/S KUMAR AND BASKAR', 'AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE FILED', '', 'M/S N UMAPATHI', 'M R FRANKLIN', 'ADDL JUDGMENTS FILED', 'MEMO FILED BY THE PETITIONER']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED 30.09.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

Crl.OP.Nos.27705 & 27966/2015 & MP.Nos.1, 1, 2 & 2/2015 [4 MPs]

[Video Conferencing]

R.Sumathi

...Petitioner in both Petitions/

Accused in No.3 both petitions

Versus

Sri Balaji Yarns,

Rep. by its Partners,

1)Rahja Manickam,

2)S.Jayakumar

Having its place of business at

No.44 B, Rakkipalayam Road,

Ammapalyam,

Anuparpalyam Post, Avinashi Taluk,

Rep. By its Office In-charge &

Power of Attorney Agent,

S.Mani

...Respondent in both petitions/

Complainant in both petitions

Common Prayer : -

Criminal Original Petitions filed under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for records in C.C.No.29/2017

and CC.No.28/2017 pending on the file of Learned Judicial

Magistrate Court, Avinashi and quash all further proceedings in

the said case as against the petitioner herein.

Prayer amended as per Order of the Court dated 20/09/2021 made

in crl.OP.No.27705 & 27966/2015.

For Petitioner in both

Petitions

: Mr.R.Baskar

For Respondent in both

Petitions

: Mr.N.Umapathi

COMMON ORDER

(1)

Heard Mr.R.Baskar, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr.N.Umapathi, learned counsel for the respondent.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

(2)

Since common arguments were advanced with respect to both

the petitions, a common order is passed.

(3)

In both the petitions, parties are also the same and they

are also agitating more or less on the same issue.

(4)

Two complaints came to be filed by the respondent in both

the petitions, under Section 138 of the Negotiable

Instruments Act read with 200 Cr.P.C., before the learned

Judicial Magistrate No.1, at Tiruppur.

(5)

The complaint given with respect to Crl.OP.No.27705/2015

had originally been taken cognizance as CC.No.306/2015 by

the learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at

Magisterial Level at Tiruppur. I am also informed that it

had been subsequently transferred to the learned Judicial

Magistrate at Avinashi and registered as CC.No.29/2017.

(6)

The complaint with respect to Crl.OP.No.27966/2015 had

originally been taken cognizance as CC.No.304/2015 by the

learned Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court at

Magisterial Level at Tiruppur and subsequently, had been

transferred to the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Avinashi,

and renumbered as CC.No.28/2017.

(7)

The respondent in both the cases/complainant is Sri Balaji

Yarns, represented by its Partners. They had, transactions

with A1, viz., SRS Knitting at Tiruppur, which is a

Partnership Firm. The partners had been shown as A2 and

A3. They are spouses.

(8)

In view of the business transactions, two cheques had been

issued towards an existing liability. Both the cheques

were dated 08.12.2008. The first cheque bore No.640583 and

the second cheque bore No.090309. They were both drawn on

the South Indian Bank Limited, Main Branch, Tiruppur. The

first cheque was for a sum of Rs.2,62,850/- and the second

cheque was for a sum of Rs.3,73,200/-.

(9)

Crl.OP.No.27705/2015 is with respect to cheque amount

Rs.2,62,850/- and Crl.OP.No.27966/2015 is with respect to

cheque amount Rs.3,73,200/-. Both the cheques when

presented for payment, returned dishonoured. In view of

that particular fact, after issuing notice and after going

through required procedural process, the defacto

complainant had given two separate complaints, originally

before the learned Judicial Magistrate/Fast Track Court at

Magisterial Level, Tiruppur and which Court had taken

cognizance of both the complaints as aforesaid, as

CC.Nos.306/2015 and 304/2015. On transfer, they are now

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

pending on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate,

Avinashi.

(10) Mr.R.Baskar, learned counsel for the petitioner raised one

issue, viz., that the petitioner herein/A3 who is also

incidentally a partner of A1/Firm, had not signed th

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