GURPAL SINGH Vs. SARITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 13.8.1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Paonta Sahib, District Sirmaur, H.P. in Cr. Complaint No. 89/3 of 1997, titled as Gurpal Singh v. Sarita and Anr.

(2.) THE appellant's complaint, filed under Section 138 of the Indian Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was dismissed on the ground that the firm, on whose behalf the cheque in question was issued by the accused persons favouring the complainant, was not arrayed as a party to the complaint.

(3.) HOWEVER , in Anil Hada v. Indian Acrylic Ltd. and R. Rajagopal v. S.S. Venkat 2001 (10) SCC 91, the Apex Court has held that complaint without impleading a firm as a party under the Negotiable Instruments Act is clearly maintainable and in T. Stanes & Co. Ltd. v. A. Jaffarullah , it has held as under: