PENGUIN UMBRELLA WORKS PVT LTD Vs. DAYANAND KAMAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant - original complainant has filed this application for leave to file appeal against the judgment and order dated 4th January, 2007 passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 13th Court, Dadar, Mumbai in C. C. No. 784/ss/2002. By the said judgment and order, the learned Magistrate acquitted respondent - original accused of the offence under section of 138 of N. I. Act.

(2.) The case of the complainant is that he had advanced a loan of Rs. 3 Lakhs without interest to the accused. In respect of the legal liability arising from the said loan of Rs. 3 Lakhs the accused issued cheque of Rs. 3 Lakhs. The said cheque was dishonoured, hence complaint came to be filed.

(3.) The case of the complainant is that the company had advanced the loan and not the Director in his individual capacity. It is seen that the complainant is a registered private limited company. In such case, every transaction of the company is expected to be recorded in the book of accounts and every transaction is to be done after sanction by the Board of Directors. It is not the case of the complainant that the board of Directors had given sanction for advancing the loan to the accused. No resolution of the Board of Directors is placed on record in respect of advancing the loan to the accused. There is no evidence brought on record by the complainant as to who paid the amount of Rs. 3 Lakhs to the accused on behalf of the complainant company and under whose sanction. No books of account or copy of income tax return has been produced on record reflecting the transaction in question.