1995 (9) TMI 408

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e filed by the present Appellant Ganesh Sukhlal Joshi, Partner of M/s Nagpur Chemical Agency (for short the 'complainant') against the Respondent No. 1 M.A. Bharati, Managing Director, M/s Nagpur Detergent Private Limited, C-27 MIDC Hinga Road, Nagpur (for short, the 'accused') in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. For the purposes of the facts, Complaint No. 1125 of 1992 filed by the complainant against the accused may be advened to. According to the complainant, it his been supplying sodium tripoly phosphate and sulphonic acid to the accused and on 10-12-1991 vide Order No. NDPL/042/91-92, complainant supplied Acid Slurry....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dgment of acquittal passed by the trial Court on 18-10-1993 and also relevant evidence available on record. 5. Mr. Kaptan, the Learned Counsel for the complainant submitted that the complaint was filed by the complainant in his capacity of Partner of M/s Nagpur Chemical Agency and there was no infirmity in filing the complaint case by one of the partners of the firm and trial Court seriously erred that the complaint filed by the complainant was not maintainable. In support of his contention, Mr. Kaptan relied upon the decision of this Court in Brijlal v. Jugalkishore 1995 (2) Crimes 636. Mr. Kaptan also contended that the trial Court seriously erred in holding that the complainant has not been able to prove that the cheques were drawn by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Magistrate and also considered the available material on record. 8. On perusal of the complaint, it is seen that the complainant is shown as "Shri Ganesh Sukhlal Joshi, Partner of M/s Nagpur Chemical Agency, Nagpur". In this view of the matter, there was no difficulty for the complainant Ganesh Sukhlal Joshi to file complaint case in his capacity as Partner of M/s Nagpur Chemical Agency and the finding recorded by the trial Court that the complaint was not properly filed, is on its face, erroneous and cannot be sustained. In Brijlal v. Jugalkishore (supra) this Court has held that the complaint by one of the partners cannot ....