2008 (5) TMI 407

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. The brief facts of these appeals are recapitulated as under : On the request of the appellants (Southern Steel Ltd.), the respondent company (Jindal Vijayanagar Steel Ltd.) had supplied HR Coils to the appellants. The terms of payment under the purchase order dated 25-4-1998 granted 45 days interest free credit to the appellants for the goods sold and delivered by the 1st respondent. The appellants had issued the cheques in question in favour of the respondent company. The said cheques were dishonoured on presentation. In response to the legal notice sent by the respondent company, the appellants, through two substantially identical replies dated 6-4-2000, for the first time, contended that the appellants had been declared a sick com....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uction (for short 'BIFR') under section 22A of SICA. They sought discharge of the accused under section 258 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, the trial court dismissed those applications. Thereafter, the appellants again approached the High Court by filing two criminal petitions for quashing the criminal proceedings. 6. The appellants placed reliance on the two judgments of this court in the matter of BSI Ltd. v. Gift Holdings (P.) Ltd. [2000] 24 SCL 351 and Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. v. Pennar Peterson Securities Ltd. [2000] 34 SCL 88. In the impugned judgment, the High Court has dealt with these two judgments along with other judgments. The High Court also accepted the legal position that the court has the power to dischar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ere made with the clear promise to repay could not be disputed by the appellants. The Directors had in fact issued the cheques for discharging their liability with the full knowledge, would not only clearly show that there was an undisputed debt, but would also show that, right from the inception, the appellants in fact had no intention of paying the amount for the purchases made by them. The intention of the appellants can be gathered by their subsequent acts, conduct and behaviour of taking a shelter under the provisions of SICA. Hence, the appellants are not entitled to any indulgence of this court under its extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. The appellants had lost their total credibility because of their ....