Satheesan,S/O Karutha Kutty vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 20295 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
  THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 8TH ASWINA, 1943
                     CRL.A NO. 327 OF 2006
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN CC 1242/2001 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF
                FIRST CLASS -I, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:

          HENKEL SPIC INDIA LTD
          AGED 1 YEARS
          A PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY HAVING ITS OFFICE AT
          CENATOPH ROAD, TEYNAMPET, CHENNAI.

          BY ADV SRI.R.MANOJ



RESPONDENTS/ACCUSED/STATE


    1     P.SURENDRANATH
          PROPRIETOR,SHAKTHI MARKETING III/161, CHENDAMANGALAM,
          NORTH PARAVUR,, KERALA, R/A. IX/159, THECHEYIL HOUSE,
          CHENDAMANGALAM PO, NORTH PARAVOOR.

    2     STATE OF KERALA ,REPRESENTED BY THE
          PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,, ERNAKULAM.

          BY SRI.SANGEETH RAJ-PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
          SRI.V.N.SUNIL KUMAR


THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.09.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Crl.A.327/2006                                    2

                                       JUDGMENT

This appeal has been filed by a Company known as 'Henkel SPIC Ltd.'

challenging the acquittal of the 1st respondent/accused in a prosecution under

Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

2. When this appeal came up before this Court, on 28.9.2021, it was

submitted by Sri. V.N. Sunil Kumar, the learned counsel appearing for the 1 st

respondent/accused that the appellant/company has been amalgamated with a

company known as 'Henkel India Ltd.' A copy of the Scheme of Amalgamation

(Annexure-A) sanctioned under Sections 391 and 394 of the Companies Act,

1956 by the High Court of Judicature at Madras is produced along with

Crl.M.A.1/2021. Clauses 4.1 and 4.2 of the Scheme provide as under:-

"4.1. Upon this Scheme coming into effect, all legal or other proceedings by or against the Transferor Company pending and/or arising on or before the Effective Date or which may be instituted in future (whether before or after the Effective Date) including their property, rights, powers, liabilities, debts, obligations and duties, etc. of the Transferor Company shall be continued and be enforced by or against the Transferee Company, as the case may be, as effectually as if the same had been pending and/or arising by or against the Transferee Company.

4.2. Transferee Company undertakes to have all legal or other proceedings initiated by or against Transferor Company referred to in sub-clause 4.1 above, transferred to in its name and to have the same continued, prosecuted and enforced by or against the Transferee Company to the exclusion of the Transferor Company."

A reading of Clause 4.2 of the sanctioned Scheme shows that the transferee

Company (Henkel India Ltd.) shall have all legal or other proceedings initiated

by or against the Transferor Company ( Henkel SPIC Ltd) transferred to its

name and to have the same continued, prosecuted and enforced by or against

the Transferee Company. The Scheme was sanctioned on 26.4.2005. No

application as contemplated in Clause 4.2 of the sanctioned Scheme is filed in

this Court. The Company Henkel SPIC Ltd., is no longer in existence. The

appeal cannot be continued at the instance of a Company, which is no longer in

existence.

Hence, this appeal is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P.

JUDGE acd