HINDUSTAN INSECTICIDES LTD. Vs. GLOBAL ADSORBENTS PVT. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the proceedings which was initiated against the present petitioners pursuant to a complaint filed by the de facto complainant on 16/6/2016, in the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Calcutta. Petitioners are the directors/government servants working for gain with the opposite party No.1 company, that is, Hindustan Insecticides Limited having its registered office at New Delhi.

(2.) Crux of the allegation against the petitioners as enumerated in the 6 page long complaint may be stated to be that the complainant once were induced by the petitioners to deliver goods. Subsequently the petitioners floated tenders when the defecto complainant participated and emerged to be the 'LI' bidder. Pursuant to the work order, the defacto complainant supplied goods. Allegedly the petitioners refused to accept the supplied goods on the pretext of that being of inferior quality. Quality was ascertained after quality control checking tests. The de facto complainant has supplied goods of a sum of Rs.1,75,440.00. However even after rejecting the goods, those were not returned back to the defacto complainant. The money was also not paid. The goods are still in the custody of the petitioners. Accordingly the defecto complainant was aggrieved of the deceitful manner in which they have been treated by the petitioners and the accused company. Also they are aggrieved of the breach of trust committed to them by present petitioners. Hence the complaint. Magistrate has taken cognizance of the same, examined two witnesses under sec. 200 Cr.P.C, 1973 and issued summons against the present petitioners.

(3.) Mr. Biswajit Manna along with Mr. Somnath Roy, appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that the de facto complainant participated in the tender process for supply of goods (active carbon) floated on 25/6/2015. Defacto complainant participated in the process by sending quotation dtd. 1/7/2015 and ultimately obtained the tender. A written purchase order was issued to them on 7/7/2015. Allegations of deceitfully compelling them to supply goods to the accused company is denied.