MANOJ KUMAR GUPTA Vs. BARCLAYS BANK, PLC

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner impugns order dated 02.04.2011 whereby the petitioner has been summoned in a complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ("hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') being C.C. No.26713/2010.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner though was a director in the accused company, however had tendered his resignation on 24.03.2010. It is contended that the resignation was thereafter accepted on 19.08.2010 and the requisite form filed with the Registrar of the Companies. Learned counsel further submits that the subject cheque based on which the complaint has been filed was issued on 21.07.2010, after the petitioner had already resigned and had ceased to participate in any of the board meetings or take part in any decision making of the accused company. Learned counsel further contends that even the averments in the complaint are vague and do not specifically show that the petitioner was in-charge or was responsible to the company for the conduct of its business.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, contends that the fact that the petitioner was a director on the date when the cheque was issued is established from the fact that the resignation was accepted later. He contends that it would be a disputed question of fact as to whether on the relevant date when the cheque was issued petitioner continued as a director or not and disputed question of fact are not to be gone into at this stage.