RAVIKANTH INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Madhusudhan Reddy, counsel representing the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor.

(2.) Respondent No.2-M/s. Jainex Limited filed complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') against the petitioners-accused in C.C.No.1539 of 2000 on the file of the XI Metropolitan Magistrate, City Civil Court, Secunderabad. The allegation in the complaint is that the petitioners had issued cheque to M/s. TATA SSL Limited bearing No.464651 dated 8-9-2000 for an amount of Rs.80,237/-. It is stated that the petitioner's transactions with M/s. TATA SSL Limited have no manner of connection with the respondent and the respondent or M/s. TATA SSL Limited cannot file any complaint against the petitioners under Section 138 of the Act. The petitioners are not liable to pay any amounts to M/s. TATA SSL Limited. It is stated that even if the averments made in the complaint are to be taken on its face value, they do not disclose any offence against the petitioners and hence the same is liable to be quashed.

(3.) The main ground of attack is that the complaint has no locus standi to file this complaint. In this context it may be appropriate to have a look at the averments made in the complaint. A-2 representing A-1 signed the cheque bearing No.464651 dated 8-9-2000 to be drawn on Vasavi Co-operative Bank Ltd., Begumpet, Hyderabad. Respondent No.2's Principal through its Manager of M/s. TATA SSL Ltd., Surya Towers, Secunderabad, had deposited the cheque with complaint's Principal Bank ICICI Bank Limited, Khairtabad. It is stated that the complainant is the holder of the cheque. It may be appropriate to have a look at paras 5 to 10 of the complaint which are as hereunder: