LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-377

KALIKA CEMENTS LIMITED Vs. GIMPEX LIMITED

Decided On April 10, 2019
Kalika Cements Limited Appellant
V/S
GIMPEX LIMITED Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitions in Crl.O.P.Nos.21731 to 21737 of 2018 have been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.3326 to 3329 of 2012, 99 to 101 of 2013, respectively, pending on the file of the Fast Track Court No.IV, George Town, Chennai arising out of the offence punishable under Sections 138 and 141 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the respondent supplied coal to the petitioners and towards the reimbursement of customs duty, wharfage charges etc. the petitioners are liable to pay a sum of Rs.36,51,61,525/- to the respondent. After deducting the payments made by the petitioners a sum of Rs.13,07,75,009/- was due and payable by them. In partial discharge of said liability, the petitioners issued 18 cheques for a sum of Rs.9 crores. The said cheques were presented for collection and the same were returned dishonoured for the reason that 'insufficient funds'. Therefore, the respondent initiated proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act by seven complaints as against which the petitioner filed quash petition in Crl.O.P.Nos.21731 to 21737 of 2018. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have already filed quash petitions before this Court in Crl.O.P.Nos.5494, 5497 to 5500 of 2017 to quash the very same proceedings initiated by the respondent before this Court and the same were dismissed by common order dated 24.11.2017 by this Court. As against the said order, the petitioners preferred Special Leave Petition before before the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India by an order dated 18.05.2018, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India observed that this Court has not been looked into the point that the compromise entered between the petitioners and the respondent under coercion pursuant to which the petitioners had issued 15 fresh cheques in full settlement of all claims of the respondent. Therefore, the petitioners were granted liberty to approach this Court once again to take up this plea.

(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent submitted that during business transaction between the petitioners and the respondent in respect of supplying the goods, they entered into three HSS agreements with the petitioners. The respondent paid lumpsum towards customs duty and wharfage charges for enabling the petitioners to clear the goods in which the balance outstanding of Rs.13,07,75,009/- by the petitioners and to repay towards the said balance amount they issued 18 cheques for a value of Rs.9 crores. All the cheques were presented for collection and returned dishonoured for the reason that 'payment stopped by the drawer'. Therefore, the respondent issued statutory notice and initiated proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act.