D GANESH Vs. A NATARAJAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) 1. The above revision is filed challenging the order dated 10.9.2003 of the learned Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Madurai, wherein the petition filed by the petitioner under Sections 204 and 245, Cr.P.C. to dismiss the complaint by dropping the proceedings.

(2.) THE respondent has filed a complaint under Sections 190(1)(a) and 200 of Cr.P.C. and 621 of the Companies Act, before the learned Magistrate, which reads as follows: He was one of the promoter of the Madurai City Benefit Fund Limited (hereinafter called as a "Company"), subscriber and also the shareholder. THE revision petitioner, who was appointed as a Clerk initially, became the Branch Manager and also the Director of the said company. THE appointment and other activities implicate the petitioner for the alleged offence under Section 314(2) r/w 629(A) of the Companies Act, and under Section 409, I.P.C. THE respondent is owning the shares of the company as per the evidence available on record, he is having transactions with the company as per Rule-3 of the Articles of Association the transactions of the Company shall be restricted to the shareholders only. THE petitioner herein, as Director and Branch Manager, has received more than two lakhs from the shareholders an members of the company and committed serious irregularities. Even though the Company has earned about Rs.43,90,301 as income for a particular year, the petitioner has not chosen to give dividend to the shareholders. But however, the said income was accounted towards the expenses of the company by falsifying the records. In the light of the above facts, the relief was sought by the complainant.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the respondent has no locus standi to approach this Court to maintain the complaint before the learned Magistrate in the light of the specific prohibition as contained under Section 621 of the Companies Act. He further contended that the respondent cannot take advantage of an order passed by the Civil Court in a connected proceedings, inasmuch as an appeal is pending as against, the said order of the Civil Court and the respondent was directed to attend the Annual General Body meeting only in pursuance of the order of the Civil Court and without, prejudice to the right of pursuing the appeal and as such, the said communication permitting the respondent to attend the meeting will not enure any benefit to him to maintain the complaint.