MAGIC FRAMES Vs. RADIANCE MEDIA P. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These petitions have been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C.Nos.3635 and 3636 of 2018, respectively, on the file of the Fast Track Court No.III (Metropolitan Level) Saidapet, Chennai.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are arraigned as A1 to A4 in the proceedings initiated by the respondent for the offences punishable under Section 138 r/w 141 and 142 of Negotiable Instruments Act . He further submitted that the respondent is engaged in the business of film financing and under the loan agreement dated 05.11.2014, the first accused firm borrowed a sum of Rs.1,50,00,000/- from the respondent. At the time of borrowal of loan the first accused company issued two cheques each for a sum of Rs.75 lakhs drawn on South Indian Bank Ltd., Valasaravakkam, for security purpose. Thereafter, the second petitioner obtained a hand loan of Rs.50,00,000/- from the respondent and issued five cheques each for a sum of Rs.10 lakhs and all the cheques, which are undated, were drawn on Tamil Nadu Mercantile Bank, Thiruvanmiyur. He further submitted that without any instructions from the petitioners, the respondent filled up all the cheques as if, those were issued on 06.03.2017 and presented the same for collection on 09.03.2017.

(3.) Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent/ complainant submitted that the petitioners approached the respondent/ complainant on various dates and obtained loan and also executed documents for the same. All the petitioners are actively involved in the day to day affairs of the partnership firms and have also signed in the documents for obtaining loan. As on 06.03.2017, there was a due by the petitioners along with interest for a sum of Rs.3,76,68,164/-. In discharge of the part liability, the petitioners issued two cheques each for sum of Rs.75 lakhs drawn on South Indian Bank Limited, Valasaravakkam Branch, Chennai. When the cheques were presented for collection, the same were returned as dishonoured. Thereafter the respondent issued statutory notice and initiated proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act as against the petitioners.