- (1.) THE petitioners have filed this petition Under Section 482, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the 'code') for quashing the order dated September 13, 1989 passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Gohana, Under Sections 145 and 146 of the Code, mainly on the ground that civil Court being already seized of the matter, the resort to the proceedings Under Sections 145 and 146 of the Code was not justifiable.
(2.) THE brief resume' of facts relevant for the disposal of this petition is that the present petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 are the partners of the firm known as Poonam Talkies along with Desh Bandu respondent No. 3. These persons entered into a partnership for running the Poonam Cinema, located at Gohana on the terms and conditions that respondent No. 3 will have a share to the tune of 25% as capital share while the remaining partners i. e. petitioners Nos. 1 to 5 will have 75% shares. On 19-5-1981, respondent No. 3 served a legal notice upon these petitioners for dissolving the said partnership concern with effect from 31-5-1981 and calling upon them to settle the accounts of the firm with respondent No. 3. The petitioners sent their reply dated 5-6-1981 to the said notice. Thereafter, respondent No. 3 filed a civil suit No. 402 of 1981 on 13-8-1981 in the Court of Sub Judge Ist Class, Gohana for rendition of accounts of the said firm.
(3.) DURING the pendency of the aforesaid suit, the civil Court appointed Mohan Lal Gupta as an Arbitrator on 11-1-1984 with the consent of both the parties. The Arbitrator then gave an award to the effect that respondent No. 3 was liable to pay Rs. 47222. 91 to the present petitioners. Thereafter, respondent No. 3 got the abovesaid suit dismissed in default on 1-5-1984. He did not file any application for restoration of the suit or any appeal against the said order and thus, the order of the civil Court dismissing the suit in default has become final. The present respondent No. 3 again filed another suit for permanent injunction on 18-8-1987 before the civil Court for restraining the Manager of the said cinema from exhibiting any picture till the settlement of the accounts between the parties. The present respondent No. 3 also filed two applications in the abovesaid suit, for appointment of a receiver and for ad interim temporary injunction from restraining the present petitioners from displaying pictures in the said talkies. These applications are still pending before the Civil Court.;