- (1.) THIS is a reference by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow, recommending that the order of Sri C. P. Srivastava, City Magistrate, Lucknow, refusing to entertain the complaint filed by the applicant under Section 282a, Indian Companies Act should be set aside.
(2.) ON 14-3-1950 the complainant applicant, The Hindustan Biologicals Limited through amaresh-war Ghosh filed a complaint against the opposite party Sri Jagat Narain Rohatgi purporting to be under Section 282a, Indian Companies Act. The allegations in the complaint inter alia are that from September, 1946 to 12-4-1949 the accused opposite party was the managing agent and managing director of the complainant company, that in such capacity the accused wrongfully obtained possession of properties of the company detailed in the complaint, that by dishonest and fraudulent representation (including express assurances that the accused would return all properties held by him on behalf of the company) the accused induced the directors of the complainant-company to accept the accused's resignation, that the accused was refusing to deliver to the company the said articles in spite of demand and was wrongfully and wilfully withholding and dishonestly retaining them to the detriment of the company for his unlawful gain and that the accused as an employee and director of the company had committed the aforesaid offence and he be punished for that according to law.
(3.) AFTER the accused was summoned, he filed a petition raising objection to the maintainability of the complaint in the Court of the city Magistrate. This objection was based on Section 3, Indian companies Act read with Section 282a of the same Act. The learned Magistrate after hearing the arguments on this point allowed the objection of the accused-opposite-party and held that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.;