2021 (12) TMI 666

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rd of the case. 3. A criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed by the firm M/s. R.V. Hardware & Sanitary Stores through one Sh. Hem Raj. The complaint was in relation to a cheque allegedly issued by the respondent. Learned trial Court has acquitted the respondent vide impugned judgment. The reasons for acquittal of the respondent as recorded by learned trial Court are that (i) the complainant/appellant had not produced the registration certificate of the firm on record; (ii) there was no document on record to show about Sh. Rinchen Thomas being the managing partner in the complainant firm and Sh. Rinchen Thomas having further authorized Hem Raj to file the complaint. Relevant part of the impugned ju....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o be produced through this application are: (i) partnership deed dated 09.10.2009, whereunder Sh. Rinchen Thomas is stated to be one of the partners of the firm M/s. R.V. Hardware & Sanitary Store; (ii) resolution dated 24.04.2016, whereunder, Sh. Rinchen Thomas has been authorized to be the managing partner of the firm; and (iii) authorization letter dated 20.05.2016, whereunder, Sh. Rinchen Thomas has allegedly authorized Hem Raj to issue notice as well as to file complaint under Section 138 of NI Act in respect of the dishonour of cheque No. 374674 dated 30.04.2016. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has prayed for setting-aside the impugned judgment dated 27.03.2019. In support of this prayer, reliance has been placed upon a judgm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... after referring to long line of decisions of various Hon'ble Courts, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court held as under:- "26. From the discussion so far, it is abundantly clear that an unauthorized partnership firm cannot approach the Court for enforcement of any right arising from a contract, hence civil proceedings for recovery of money would be barred by virtue of sub Section (2) of Section 69 of the Partnership Act. However, proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act cannot be treated as civil suit for recovery of cheque amount with interest as was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in R. Vijayan vs. Baby and another (2012) 1 SCC 260." Finally, the appeal was allowed. The judgment impugned in M/s. Uttam Trader's....