AMRUTLAL PRANLAL PANCHAL Vs. PRAHLADBHAI RAJARAM MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Amrutlal Pranlal Panchal by this Criminal Revision Application has challenged the impugned judgment and order dated 5th November, 1996 rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1996 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kaira at Nadiad, wherein the order of conviction and sentence passed against him under Sec. 630 of the Companies Act by the learned J.M.F.C., Nadiad came to be confirmed.

(2.) To briefly narrate few relevant facts of the case, petitioner herein was serving in New Shorrock Mills, Nadiad in Engineering Department and was given a company quarter as an employee. Now, as per the terms of the contract this quarter was required to be vacated on termination of the services of the employee or on his resignation from the job, and accordingly, was further required to hand over possession of the same to the company. In the instant case, since the accused left his services on 25th February, 1989 his right qua the terms and conditions to be in possession of the Company quarter in question allotted to him came to an end. Now, despite this glaring fact, petitioner quite illegally held on the possession and as a result, the Company was constrained to file a complaint against the petitioner under Sec. 630 of the Companies Act. This came to be registered as Criminal Case No. 2125 of 1989 in the Court of learned J.M.F.C., Nadiad wherein by the judgment and order dated 29th June, 1996 he came to be convicted for the alleged offence and was sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default to undergo further S.I. for seven days alongwith further order directing him to hand over the possession of the premises in question. Feeling aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order, petitioner filed an appeal, the same being Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 1996 before the Sessions Court, Kaira at Nadiad. This came to be dismissed by judgment and order dated 5th November, 1996 giving rise to the present Criminal Revision Application as stated above in para-1 of this judgment.

(3.) Heard learned Advocates appearing for the respective parties.