M/S. SHRI SUDARSHAN INDUSTRIES PLOT NO. C60, M.I.D.C. WARDHA Vs. HYGENIC PALM OIL PVT. LTD. AND ORS.
LAWS(BOM)-2018-1-399
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on January 16,2018

M/S. Shri Sudarshan Industries Plot No. C60, M.I.D.C. Wardha Appellant
VERSUS
Hygenic Palm Oil Pvt. Ltd. And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

ROHIT B.DEO,J. - (1.) One Shri Ashok Thanvi, who is described as Proprietor/Partner of M/s. Shree Durga Trading Company in Criminal Complaint 3541/2005 under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act ('Act' for short) is acquitted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class, Wardha by judgment and order dated 26.03.2013 which is impugned herein.
(2.) The complaint was instituted by the complainant arraying Hygienic Palm Oil Private Limited through Shri Bharat Patel and Shri Snehalbhai Patel as accused 1 and M/s. Shree Durga Trading Company through Partner/Proprietor Shri Ashok Thanvi as accused 2. The complainant could not secure the presence of accused 1 whose trial was therefore separated.
(3.) The gist of the complaint is that the complainant M/s. Sudarshan Industries, Wardha is a manufacturer of washed cotton seed oil and other oils. In accordance with telephonic talk with the accused, the said company dispatched 9835 kg. washed cotton seed oil worth Rs. 4,07,169/on 27.06.2004 from Wardha to accused 1. The necessary documents inter alia a provisional bill in the name of accused 1 and advice letter for sale of goods were dispatched along with the goods. Accused 2 is a broker carrying on business under the trade name Shriji Broker, Shri Durga Trading Company and Shri Balkrishna Traders. The complaint asserts that Shri Ashok Thanvi may either the proprietor or the partner of the said firm. The complaint further avers that it was accused 2 who made the payment on behalf of accused 1 against the goods earlier sold to accused 1. The averment in the complaint is that accused 1 used to sent said bill duly addressed to the complainant through accused 2 along with Form. However, as regards the relevant transaction neither the sale bill nor the Fform was received by the complainant. Accused 2 issued three cheques to the complainant against the goods dispatched on 27.06.2004 in the name of Shakambari Traders. Accused 2, as proprietor of Shri Durga Trading Company issued the cheque 322127 dated 02.11.2004 for Rs. 2,25,000/- against the balance dues. The complainant presented the cheque for payment on 19.04.2005, the said cheque was dishonoured and the statutory notices were issued to both the accused. Accused 1 replied asserting that payment was made to accused 2 while accused 2 refused to accept the statutory notice.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.