Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (6) TMI 903

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he order dated 23.06.2008 passed by the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta in connection with Case No.C/8660 of 2006. 2. The Complaint Case No.C/8660 of 2006 was filed against the accused/petitioner under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 in the Court of Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta on 21.08.2006. The allegation is that the Howrah Motor Company Limited is a Company within the meaning of the Companies Act, 1956. The Company appointed Gokuleswar Ghosh, father of the accused/petitioner as an Officer who was subsequently appointed as a wholetime Director of the Company and provided him with a free housing accommodation while he was looking after the business of the Mumbai Branch of the Company. As the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he Learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta took cognizance of the offence and transferred the case to the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta, for disposal. Thereafter, he proceeded with the case and after examining the complainant and other witnesses issued process against the accused/petitioner. After appearance the accused/petitioner filed a petition on 08.02.2007 challenging the maintainability of the proceedings for want of jurisdiction and prayed for dismissal of the case. The Learned Magistrate, rejected such petition holding that the Court has jurisdiction to entertain the case and the case is well-maintainable. Being dissatisfied with such order, the petitioner/accused preferred a Revision being Criminal R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... within the scope and ambit of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to entertain the complaint or to hold the trial, merely because the complainant Company has its office in Kolkata. Therefore according to him the impugned order is bad in law and is liable to be set aside. He cited a decision Vijai Kapur v. Guest Keen Williams Ltd. [1995] 83 Comp. Cas. 339 (Cal.) in support of his submission. 6. Mr. Mukherjee, Learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the O.P. No.2, on the other hand submitted that merely because the accused/petitioner had filed a Civil Suit in Mumbai it cannot be said that the Civil Court was in seisin of bonafide dispute between the parties and the criminal Court is debarred from proceeding with the complaint filed u .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... He, thus, concluded by urging that the instant Revisional Application be dismissed. He relied on the decision Atul Mathur v. Atul Kalra [1989] 4 SCC 514 in support of his submission. 7. In reply Mr. Ghosh, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the Special Leave Petition was simply dismissed in limine by the Hon'ble Supreme Court without making any comment on the correctness or otherwise of the grounds or the subject matter of the petition for which leave was sought. Therefore according to him it was a non-speaking order of dismissal without anything more indicating the grounds or reasons of its dismissal. Thus, it cannot be said that the said order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court has become final so as .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... above, this petition is legally barred and is not maintainable under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 11. That apart the instant application is also barred in view of the order of dismissal passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Transfer Petition (CRL) No.102 of 2009. It appears that by filing such Transfer Petition the petitioner prayed for transfer of the instant complaint case pending before the Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 17th Court, Calcutta, West Bengal, to the corresponding Competent Court of Learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Mumbai, Maharashtra, principally on the ground that no cause of action arose at Calcutta for filing a complaint case under Section 630 of the Companies Act, 1956 by the Respondent given the fact that the property in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates