LAWS(APH)-2004-4-119

SAGAR CEMENTS LTD Vs. P SRINIVAS

Decided On April 01, 2004
SAGAR CEMENTS LTD., HYDERABAD Appellant
V/S
P.SRINIVAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 23.4.1998 in C.C. No.125 of 1994, on the file of the V Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad (Trial Court), wherein the complaint filed by the appellant/complainant under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (for short "the Act"), against the respondent/accused herein, was held to be not maintainable in law, and the accused was acquitted under Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "Cr.P.C."), for the offence under Section 138 of the Act.

(2.) The case of the complainant was that the complainant, being a company, by name M/s.Sagar Cements Limited, carrying on business in cement and it supplied cement to its dealer, who is the accused herein. In the course of the said business, the accused issued cheque bearing No.312354, dated 24.11.1993, for Rs.99,000/-, towards the outstanding balance of Rs.10,28,859-20 ps. When the complainant company presented the said cheque into the bank, the same was returned with an endorsement "funds insufficient". In spite of the legal notice, dated 12.1.1994, issued to the accused, the accused has not arranged for the payment, resulting which the complainant company constrained to file the present complaint by invoking the provisions under Section 138 of the Act.

(3.) The complainant is a limited company, representing by its Chief Commercial Manager-cum-Administrative Officer, M. Vinod Kumar S/o. Vasantha Rao. The Trial Court had taken cognizance of the offence and immediately thereof, the said Vinod Kumar had resigned to his job and left the complainant company. Thereafter, there was no representation before the Trial Court on behalf of the complainant company. Under those circumstances, the complainant company filed Crl. M.P. No.2721 of 1996, seeking permission of the Court to allow one Kanuri Prasad who is the General Manager of the company, to represent the matter and prosecute the case. The said application was disposed of on 3.10.1996 with the following order: