KANWALJIT KAUR AHLUWALIA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS judgment will dispose of CRR No. 1613 of 2013 and CRR No. 1614 of 2013, titled as Mrs. Kanwaljit Kaur Ahluwalia Versus State of Punjab and another, preferred against two separate judgments dated 25.4.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Amritsar, in separate criminal appeals bearing Nos. RBT 104 of 2011/2012 and RBT 143 of 2011/2013 titled as Mrs. Kanwaljit Kaur Ahluwalia and another Versus Golden Organics Pvt. Ltd., between the same parties under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (in short 'the N.I. Act'), affirming the judgment and order dated 1.9.2011, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Amristar, in separate criminal complaints bearing Nos. 329 of 2002 and 499 of 2003, titled as Golden Organics Pvt. Ltd. Versus Mrs. Kamaljit Kaur Ahuluwalia and others, vide which accused/revisionist and her husband S.P. Singh Ahluwalia were convicted under Section 138 of the N.I. Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/ - each, in default thereof, to undergo further simple imprisonment for three months in each complaint. However, in appeal, the other accused i.e. S.P. Singh Ahluwalia (husband of the accused/revisionist) was acquitted of the charges framed against him, vide two separate judgments dated 25.4.2013, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Amritsar.

(2.) COMMON facts of the case are that the complainantCompany M/s Golden Organics Pvt. Ltd. entered into an agreement with concerns M/s Madhu Fabricators and M/s Alpha Consultants and Associates on 9th/12th of June, 2000 to instal formaldehyde plant at the premises of the complainant. Accused No. 1 Mrs. Kamaljit Kaur Ahluwalia (wrongly mentioned as Kanwaljit Kaur Ahluwalia) is the proprietor of M/s Madhu Fabricators, whereas accused No. 2 S.P. Singh Ahluwalia, who happens to be the husband of accused No. 1, is the proprietor of M/s Alpha Consultants and Associates. Both concerns are stated to be the family concerns of the accused. Accused failed to instal the said plant in accordance with the terms and conditions of the said agreement. The machinery of the plant was not supplied within time. It was very slow and short supply of the machinery for installing the plant. Due to the fault of the accused, complainant suffered damages and financial losses. The complainant -Company even engaged the services of some other concern for installation of plant and machinery. The complainant wrote number of letters sent through U.P.C., requesting the accused to fulfill the terms and conditions of the agreement and instal the machinery within time. A letter dated 14.12.2001 (Ex.P3) was sent through U.P.C., requesting the accused to expedite the matter.

(3.) THEN , another letter dated 4.1.2002 (Ex.P10) was written, wherein it was stated that the complainant has suffered the damages. The details of the damages were claimed to the tune of Rs. 57.11 lacs. It was also mentioned that Rs. 80 lacs have been paid to the accused, but the machinery supplied to the complainant is of much lesser value i.e. only Rs. 25 lacs. Again, letters dated 21.1.2002, 10.4.2002 and 10.5.2002 were sent through U.P.C. Ultimately, accused No. 1 replied the said letters, vide registered letter dated 1.6.2002 (Ex.P26), in which accused had shown their inability to comply with the agreement dated 10/12.6.2000. It also acknowledged the letters above and also stated that the losses suffered by the complainant have been assessed by the accused at Rs. 40 lacs. It was requested that the terms of losses can be settled by sitting face to face. It was further stated that following cheques were enclosed with the registered letters : -