BHAI MANJIT SINGH Vs. SANGAM INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Service has been effected on the respondent. No one has cared to appear. Therefore, the matter is being proceeded with in their absence.

(2.) This revision petition is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 31.8.1999 in CC No. 660/1 whereby the learned Magistrate has held that resolution, Ex. CW-1/1, is the resolution which empowers the complainant to institute criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that a bare reading of the resolution indicates that no such power has been given to Mr. Gupta and/or Mr. Aggarwal to institute criminal proceedings. The resolution dated 8/02/1995 has been produced before me and reads as under:

(3.) In this view of the matter, having gone through the resolution and heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view mat the authorisation, Ex. CW- , 1/1, does not entitle the complainant to institute criminal proceedings. I, therefore, quash complaint No. 660/1 titled Sangam India Ltd. v. Montari Industries Ltd. 6- Am.' This petition stands disposed of. Petition disposed of.