Madras High Court
M/S.Ramraj Industries vs M/S.Ssa & Company on 8 September, 2021
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 08.09.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 and 14323 of 2018
and Crl.M.P.Nos.7240 and 7243 of 2018
1.M/s.Ramraj Industries,
Rep. by its Partners,
No.29/5B, M.C. Road,
Kilmurugai Village,
Ambur, Vellore District.
2.P.Ram Kumar,
Partner of M/s.Ramraj Industries
3.P.Rajasekar,
Partner of M/s.Ramraj Industries
4.P.Mangaiyarthilagam,
Partner of M/s.Ramraj Industries .. Petitioners
Vs.
M/s.SSA & Company,
Rep by its Authorised Signatory,
No.1, Devaraj Nagar,
Opp. IVPM, MBT Road,
Ranipet, Vellore District. .. Respondent
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions filed under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records of C.C.Nos.80 & 82
of 2017, respectively, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate,
Ranipet, Vellore District and quash the same.
For Petitioners in both petitions : Mr.S.P.Arthi
For Respondent in both petitions : Mr.Parthasarathy
COMMON ORDER
These petitions have been filed to call for the records in
C.C.Nos.80 & 82 of 2017, respectively, pending on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Ranipet, Vellore District and quash the same.
2. The case of the prosecution is that A1 is a Company, A2 to A4
are the partners of the said Company. The accused Company is involved in
manufacturing activities in leathers. The accused Company purchased
Fevicol Adhesive and Adhesive Tapes from the complainant due to which,
the accused Company is due to pay a sum of Rs.9,44,479/- and
Rs.30,00,000/- to the complainant. When the complainant demanded the
said due amount of Rs.39,44,479/-/-, A2 to A4 had issued various cheques,
in favour of the complainant. To the shock and surprise of the complainant,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
the cheques on being presented were returned for ''Funds Insufficient'' and
the same was communicated to the complainant who issued lawyer's notice
dated 20.01.2016, calling upon the accused 2 to 4 to clear off the amount
due. Even after the issuance of the statutory notice, the petitioners have
failed to settle the amount due and hence the complainant was filed under
Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act against the petitioners in
C.C.Nos.80 & 82 of 2017, respectively, on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate, Ranipet, Vellore District.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted
that the 1st petitioner is a Partnership Firm and the petitioners 2 to 4 are its
partners and all are family members. The entire business administration is
solely taken care of by the 3rd petitioner herein and petitioners 2 and 4 are
not involved in the day-to-day affairs of the Company. The 3rd petitioner had
placed orders for purchase of fevicol adhesives and fevicol tapes and the
respondent complainant also supplied the same to the 1st petitioner
Company. Thereafter, misunderstanding arose between the parties due to the
quality of the product that was supplied. The petitioners called upon the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
respondent's representative to sort out the issues amicably, however there
was no positive response from the respondent and the respondent
complainant had hurriedly initiated 138 proceedings with false claims and
untrue allegations and misusing the judicial form to harass the petitioners.
4. It is further submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioners that the entire affairs of the Company was taken care by the 3 rd
respondent. The petitioners 2 and 4 have no role to play in the above said
proceedings and therefore, the 138 proceedings against the petitioners 2 and
4 are not sustainable and further on instructions, he submitted that the
petitioners 1 and 3 are ready to face the trial and therefore, this Court may
issue a direction to the Trial Court to expedite the trial and complete the
same as early as possible and furthermore, the appearance of the petitioners
before the Trial Court may be dispensed with. Hence prays for allowing of
these petitions against petitioners 2 and 4.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent fairly
conceded for quashing the complaint in respect of petitioners 2 and 4 and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
opposed to grant relief to the petitioners 1 and 3, as they are responsible for
all business related transactions and directly involved into the affairs of the
Company.
6. This Court has carefully considered the rival submissions and
also perused the available materials, particularly, the private complaint
lodged by the respondent.
7. The facts in the present case is not in dispute that there existed
commercial transaction between the parties concerned. The petitioners
herein had only disputed the false claims made by the respondent
complainant against the petitioners. Though various claims made against the
petitioners, it is the case of the petitioners that the petitioners 2 and 4 are not
involved into the affairs of the Company.
8. Further without any details as to how the petitioners 2 and 4
herein, in their capacity as partners were responsible for the issuance of the
cheques, implicating the petitioners 2 and 4 for the offence under Section
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not justifiable. Further, the said
fact has also been fairly conceded by the respondent. Hence this Court is
inclined to quash the complaints against the petitioners 2 and 4. Insofar as
the petitioners 1 and 3 are concerned, on the submission made by the
learned counsel for the petitioners, on instructions, that the petitioners 1 and
3 are ready to face the trial and further the 3 rd respondent himself admitted
that he placed orders for purchase of the above said raw materials and
reiterates that the entire business activities and its related transactions were
solely dealt with by him, this Court is of the opinion that he shall face trial
before the Trial Court. It is left open to the petitioners 1 and 3 to raise all the
contentions before the Trial Court and the same shall be considered on its
own merits and in accordance with law.
9. For the reasons aforesaid, this Criminal Original Petition is
allowed insofar as petitioners 2 and 4 are concerned and C.C.Nos.80 & 82
of 2017, respectively, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate,
Ranipet, Vellore District, are quashed insofar as petitioners 2 and 4.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
10. In respect of petitioners 1 and 3, these petitions are disposed
of directing the trial court to dispose of C.C.Nos.80 & 82 of 2017, as
expeditiously as possible as per seniority of the case. The petitioners and
respondent are directed to co-operate with the trial court for the early
completion of trial. Further, taking into consideration the request as made
by the learned counsel for the petitioners, the appearance of petitioners 1
and 3 before the trial court is dispensed with except for their appearance for
the purpose of receiving the copy of the proceedings u/s 207 Cr.P.C.,
framing of charges, questioning under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and on the day
on which judgment is to be pronounced. However, if for any particular
reason, the presence of the petitioners is necessary, the trial court, at its
wisdom, shall direct their appearance on those days. Consequently
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
08.09.2021
Speaking/Non Speaking order
Index : Yes/No
Internet: Yes/No
sk
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate,
Ranipet, Vellore District.
2. The Additional District cum Judicial Magistrate,
Ambur, Vellore District.
3. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
Sk
Crl.O.P.Nos.14321 to 14323 of 2018
08.09.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
