ANIL SACHAR Vs. SHREE NATH SPINNERS PVT. LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (hereinafter called as 'the Act') against the respondents/accused on allegations which may be indicated as under :- M/s Shree Nath Spinners Pvt. Limited and M/s A.T. Overseas Limited are independent partnership concerns. There is an apparent and conceded commonness between the two inasmuch as both have same set of persons constituting the respective Board of Directors.

(2.) APPELLANT /applicants are running business under the name and style of M/s Ratti Woollen Mills. Anil Sacher is one of its active partner who is competent to file that complaint. Respondent no.1 M/s Shree Nath Spinners Pvt. Limited placed an order for the supply of goods with the appellants. The supply was made and respondent no. 1- M/s Shree Nath Spinners Pvt. Limited issued two cheques in favour of the appellants-complainant through their sister concern M/s A.T. Overseas (respondent no. 2) under signature of respondent-accused Munish Jain. The cheques bounced for want of sufficiency of funds. The appellants/complainant served a statutory notice upon the respondents/accused requiring them to pay up but notice did not evoke any favourable response. The appellants/complainant were thereby impelled to file the impugned (private) complaint under Section 138 of the Act.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the appellants/complainants argues that learned Trial Court did not, at all, appreciate the provisions of law by not noticing that a liability under Section 138 of the Act would arise when the cheque is issued by even a non party to the contract but for the discharge of a debit/liability. The attention of this Court, in support of the above averment, is invited towards the underlined portion of Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which reads as under :-