LUSTURE AGENCIES PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. MAGMA LEASING LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short the Code) is aimed at quashing the criminal proceeding being complaint case No. C/609 of 2006 under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called the N.I. Act), 1881 now pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court, Calcutta.

(2.) Mr. Ashim Kumar Routh, the learned Advocate for the petitioners submitted that the complainant referred the matter of dispute between the financer complainant and hirer petitioners to the Arbitrator and the Arbitrator also passed an award which covered all the points including the dues of the complainant. The award was passed on the basis of claim application filed by the O. P. No. 1 under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. Another application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act was filed by the O. P. No. 1 before the learned 6th Judge, City Civil Court at ' Calcutta in Misc. Case No. 2076 of 2005. The petitioner has challenged the award no doubt by tiling a petition for setting aside the award. By the order of the learned Judge of the City Civil Court receiver was appointed to take possession of the vehicle. There was one hire purchase agreement between the petitioners and O. P. No. 1. The vehicle of the petitioner was stolen from Bihar and the driver lodged FIR at concerned police station in Bihar. The petitioners submitted their claim before the Insurance Company. The claim of the petitioners before the Insurance Company is still pending. The petitioners requested the O.P.No.1 to wait for few months and informed him that he would make the payment after receiving their claim amount from the Insurance Company. At the time of taking loan from the O.P. No.1, they issued some post dated cheques and thereafter, they sent instruction to the Bank for "stop payment" and also informed the matter to O.P. No.1. The O.P. No.1 suppressed everything before the City Civil Court and obtained order and also suppressing everything lodged the complaint against the petitioners.

(3.) Mr. Routh further submitted that five cheques were dishonoured as the petitioners clearly stated that after the award was passed by the learned Arbitrator the cheques cannot be encashed. After the award was passed by the Arbitrator there cannot be any further liability of the petitioners for payment of dues of complainant. There was no element of Section 138 as well as Section 141 of the N.I. Act against the petitioners. Before lodging of complaint the petitioners duly informed the bank and the complainant about their instruction of "stop payment".