Y VENKAT REDDY Vs. JAGADAMBA ENTERPRISES HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since common questions of fact and law arise and since petitioner and 1 st respondent in all the cases are the same in these petitions, they are disposed of by a common order.

(2.) Petitioner in all these cases issued 13 cheques, all in favour of the 1st respondent, on various dates, which were dishonoured. After issuing statutory notice to the petitioner, 1st respondent lodged a complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act (the Act) against the petitioner. The learned Magistrate took cognizance of the cases and issued summons to the petitioner. Petitioner filed petitions in each case under Section 204 Cr.PC seeking to discharge him from the cases, inter alia, contending that the complaints filed by the complainant through its Manager, who has not been properly authorized to represent the 1st respondent, which is a proprietory concern, are not maintainable. The learned Magistrate dismissed the said petitions. Questioning the said order, petitioner preferred revisions before this Court in Crl.R.C. Nos. 1120 of 2001 etc., which came up for consideration before my learned brother T. CH.Surya Rao, J, who, by his judgment dated 3-1-2002, by dismissing all the revision petitions, confirmed the order of dismissal of the petitions for discharge, holding that a proprietory concern, where a single person carries on business in the name or style other than his own name, can sue or be sued and in the absence of the specific provision in Cr.PC., the principle laid down in Rule 10 of Order 30 CPC can be invoked. Now the petitioner came up with petitions to quash the complaints on the basis that Vilas Mangulkar who signed the complaints is neither the payee nor the holder in due course of dishonoured cheques and so he cannot maintain the complaints, and since he also not a person authorized to sign the complaint on behalf of the complainant concern all the complaints are liable to be quashed.

(3.) The point for consideration is whether there are grounds to quash the complaints.