K.K. POLYCOLOR INDIA LTD. Vs. GLOBAL TRADE FIN. LTD.
LAWS(SC)-2014-9-37
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on
September 04,2014
K.K. Polycolor India Ltd.
Appellant
VERSUS
Global Trade Fin. Ltd.
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
K BHASKARAN VS. SANKARAN VAIDHYAN BALAN [REFERRED TO]HARMAN ELECTRONICS PVT LTD VS. NATIONAL PANASONIC INDIA LTD [REFERRED TO]
DASHRATH RUPSINGH RATHOD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
JUDGEMENT
-
(1.)Leave granted.
(2.)These appeals arise out of an order dated 15th September, 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay whereby Crl. Application Nos. 1491, 2759 and 2760 of 2010 have been allowed and the orders passed by the Magistrate set aside and the matter remitted back to the Magistrate with the direction that the criminal complaints filed by the complainants-Respondents herein shall be disposed of expeditiously.
(3.)Complaints Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1880 appear to have been filed by the Respondent-company in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra which were entertained by the Magistrate and process issued against the accused persons. Revision applications were then filed before the Court of Sessions at Bombay challenging the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to entertain the complaints. The Revisional Court relying upon Harman Electronics Private Limited and Anr. v. National Panasonic India Private Limited, 2009 1 SCC 720held that the Magistrate did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaints. The orders passed by the Magistrate were set aside and the complaints directed to be returned for presentation before the competent Court. Aggrieved by the said orders the complainant preferred Criminal Applications No. 1491, 2759 and 2760 of 2010 before the High Court who relying upon the decision of this Court in K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan, 1999 7 SCC 510and three other decisions of the Bombay High Court held that the Magistrate had the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the cheque had been presented before a bank at Bombay which fact was, according to the High Court, sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the Magistrate to entertain the complaints and try the cases. The orders passed by the Revisional Court were accordingly set aside and the Magistrate directed to proceed with the trial of the cases expeditiously as already noticed. The present special leave petitions have been filed by the accused persons assailing the view taken by the High Court.
(2.)These appeals arise out of an order dated 15th September, 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay whereby Crl. Application Nos. 1491, 2759 and 2760 of 2010 have been allowed and the orders passed by the Magistrate set aside and the matter remitted back to the Magistrate with the direction that the criminal complaints filed by the complainants-Respondents herein shall be disposed of expeditiously.
(3.)Complaints Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1880 appear to have been filed by the Respondent-company in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Bandra which were entertained by the Magistrate and process issued against the accused persons. Revision applications were then filed before the Court of Sessions at Bombay challenging the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to entertain the complaints. The Revisional Court relying upon Harman Electronics Private Limited and Anr. v. National Panasonic India Private Limited, 2009 1 SCC 720held that the Magistrate did not have the jurisdiction to entertain the complaints. The orders passed by the Magistrate were set aside and the complaints directed to be returned for presentation before the competent Court. Aggrieved by the said orders the complainant preferred Criminal Applications No. 1491, 2759 and 2760 of 2010 before the High Court who relying upon the decision of this Court in K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan, 1999 7 SCC 510and three other decisions of the Bombay High Court held that the Magistrate had the jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the cheque had been presented before a bank at Bombay which fact was, according to the High Court, sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon the Magistrate to entertain the complaints and try the cases. The orders passed by the Revisional Court were accordingly set aside and the Magistrate directed to proceed with the trial of the cases expeditiously as already noticed. The present special leave petitions have been filed by the accused persons assailing the view taken by the High Court.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.