P MUTHURAMAN Vs. PADMAVATHI FINANCE REGD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition filed under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records in CC. No. 3504 of 1992 on the file of the XVI Metropolitan Magistrate, George Town, Madras, and to quash the same. The complaint was filed under sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, by the complainant, Shree Padmavathi Finance, a partnership firm represented by its partner T. K. Subramani. It was averred in the complaint that the accused borrowed a sum of Rs. 25, 000 and executed a promissory note dated December 3, 1990, to repay the said amount and borrowed a further sum of Rs. 25, 000 by executing a second promissory note dated December 3, 1990. After giving credit to the amount paid by the accused a sum of Rs. 20, 875 was due under both promissory notes. The petitioner accused issued a cheque bearing No. 659832 for a sum of Rs. 20, 875 dated March 20, 1992, drawn on the State Bank of Travancore, Madras (Main Branch) and signed the cheque as proprietor of Sri Saravana Transport Co. The said cheque was presented on April 23, 1992, by the complainant and it was returned by the bank on April 25, 1992, with an endorsement "not arranged for". After completing the issue of notices, the complainant filed the complaint.

(2.) THE only contention submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is the sole proprietor of Sri Saravana Transport Co. and Sri Saravana Transport Co. was not made a party in the complaint and as such there is infirmity in the complaint and the same ought to be quashed. I am unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. THE sole proprietary concern is not a legal entity apart from the sole proprietor and, therefore, there is no need to make the sole proprietary concern a party in the complaint. Offences by companies are dealt with under section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, which is as follows :