SURENDRA MAL MEHTA Vs. GILLETTE INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petition is filed seeking quashment of the criminal proceedings in C. C. No. 26715 of 2004 pending on the file of the learned XIV Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore , Chennai.

(2.) THE petitioners are the accused in a case under sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act launched by the respondent/complainant.

(3.) THE records filed on the side of the complainant would establish that there had been amalgamation of M/ s. Indian Shaving Products Limited with M/ s. Gillette Indialimited. THE banker of course has returned the cheque as though a cheque was presented for collection by M/ s. Indian Shaving Products Limited. It is submitted that the complainant had already informed the banker about the amalgamation of those two companies and the existence of M/ s. Gillette India limited alone after amalgamation but the banker has wrongly mentioned in the memo and returned the cheques as though M/ s. Indian Shaving Products Limited was still in vogue. As sufficient material is produced on the side of the complainant to show the amalgamation as per the orders in the company petition, and such a disputed fact will have to be thrashed out only by the trial Court after scanning the evidence produced before it, this Court under the inherent jurisdiction is disinclined to quash the proceedings on that score.