BALAKRISHNAN Vs. A.P.S. EXPORTS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed by the second accused in S.T.C.No.637 of 2006 on the file of the District Munsif -cum -Judicial Magistrate, Paramathi seeking to quash the proceedings.

(2.) THE respondent has filed the complaint against the petitioner and five other accused under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, on the basis that the first accused firm has got a liability of Rs.7,67,885.60/ - and issued a cheque on 16.4.2006 for a sum of Rs.3,14,032/ - to the complainant drawn on Bank of Baroda, Karur Branch. The respondent has presented the above cheque for collection in his bank ("Indian Overseas Bank", Karur Branch) on 4.10.2006 and the cheque was returned on the same day with an endorsement "Exceeds Arrangements" vide memo dated 4.10.2006. Intimation was sent to the respondent on the same day from the Bank and he had sent a statutory notice to the accused on 17.10.2006 through his Advocate by registered post. The accused Nos.1, 3, 5 and 6 have evaded the service of the notice and accused Nos.2 and 4 alone have received notices on 19.10.2006 and 23.10.2006 respectively. The petitioner/second accused has responded to the said notice by giving reply on 28.10.2006 refuting the averments made in the notice, and stated that the petitioner ceased to be a partner with effect from 1.4.1999 itself and therefore he is not liable for the cheque issued on behalf of the firm.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that even in the reply notice sent by him, he has specifically stated that he is no more a partner in the said firm and he had resigned from the firm on 1.4.1999 itself. Inspite of it, the complaint has been filed against him also which is not sustainable.