T VENKATRAM REDDY Vs. N VENKATA NARAYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE 4lh and 5th accused (4th and 3rd accused)in C. C. No. 797 of 2008 on the file of the iii Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, nampally, Hyderabad filed the criminal petition to quash the further proceedings against them therein.

(2.) AN advertisement stated to have been issued by one Sri K. S. Vadivelu, Advocate, b. T. M Layout, Bangalore, dated 5-10-2007, was published in Deccan Chronicle, Hyderabad edition on 15-10-2007, while was styled as a caution Notice issued under the instructions of the client of the said counsel, M/s. Jewargi power Private Limited. The advertisement brought to the notice of the general public that the complainant in C. C. No. 797 of 2008 ceased to be the Director of the said company with effect from 23-5-2007 and that the Board of directors of the company had revoked/ cancelled all powers and authorization accorded earlierto him to negotiate and finalise any take over deals of the company. The advertisement further stated that they received feedback from theirclients and general public that the complainant in C. C. No. 797 of 2008 was attempting to negotiate and finalise the take over deal of the company and impeding the setting up of Coal Based Power Plant on behalf of the company, promoting himself as one of the Directors of the company despite his cessation. The advertisement seeks to put the general public to notice, as a matter of abundant caution, that the complainant in c. C. No. 797 of 2008 is not authorized for any action whatsoever on behalf of the company, its Board of Directors or any of the company's shareholders to deal, negotiate or enter into any contracts on behalf of the company or represent the company before any relevant authorities. It was also stated that the said complainant has no claims on any assets or projects of the company and is no longer associated with the company and the company proposes to initiate legal actions against the said complainant for misrepresentation and attempting to cheat the public. By the advertisement, the company informed and cautioned their unwary clients and public at large that the company shall not be responsible for any obligation arising out of any contract or agreements entered into by anyone with the said complainant, whose photograph was also published above the written content of the advertisement.

(3.) THE complaint gaveadetailed account of the complainant being made a Director of m/s. Jewargi Power Private Limited to bring in investment from their parties and his own group of companies and the complainant and his group of companies accordingly investing rs. 371. 58 lakhs and being allotted shares by the company. The complaint further stated about the complainant and the 1st accused alone remaining as the directors on the Board of the company and the 2nd accused being later inducted as a Director and being allotted shares in violation of the company law without the knowledge of the complainant. The complaint stated the complainant to have been taken by uttershock and surprise by the offending advertisement in Deccan Chronicle, managed and represented by the petitioners. The complaint proceeds further to state how accused 1 and 2 conspired to get rid of the complainant and his companies and also about the career of the complainant as an entrepreneur and a technocrat with a reputation for honesty, integrity and uncompromising attitude, which were injured by the offending, false and defamatory statement.