Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home

2019 (9) TMI 481

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... post dated cheque issued to the Complainant in lieu of the Loan amount will be honoured in the due course. The contention of the Ld. Senior Counsel on behalf of the Petitioner that at the relevant point of time, the petitioner was neither a Director nor held a responsible position in the accused company for conducting day to day affairs of the accused company loses its significance as the petitioner was in fact President of the Accused Company and had written the aforesaid letter to the Complainant just 4 days after the alleged meeting happened. The Court below after going through evidence supported by direct evidence of CW1 took cognizance of offence under Section 420/34 IPC. This Court find no ground to interfere with Summoning Order - Pe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the rate of 31% per annum and promised to pay the said loan after 90 days from the date of payment. For availing the said facility, the accused executed various documents recording the said loan transaction and also executed a promissory note of the said amount with interest in favour of the complainant. The Accused No.2 stood guarantor for repayment of the said amount. Thereafter, the inter corporate deposit agreement cum pledge deed was executed between Complainant and Accused No.1 Company on June 8, 1996 at New Delhi and the sum was repayable by the accused persons to the complainant at New Delhi. Moreover, accused persons informed the complainant that their financial position is sound and the post dated cheque bearing no. 884068 dated 0 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he present petitioner was unnecessarily dragged and was made an accused in the present complaint. 8. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that the complaint has been made as if there is vicarious liability for an offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. He further submitted that the complainant has not furnished any document as to show the involvement of the present petitioner in grant of loan. He further submitted that the Summoning Order is vague and without any material and thus is bad in Law and without application of mind. Learned Senior Counsel relied on Supreme Court Judgment in Harshendra Kumar v. Rebatilata Koley and Ors. (2011) 3 SCC 351, M/s GHCL Employees Stock Option Trust v. M/s India Infoline Ltd. (2013) 4 SCC 505, Therm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the accused did so Dishonestly. 12. In the instant case, the petitioner was the President of M/s GSL (India) Ltd. and his letter dated 12.06.1996 to the complainant is reproduced as under: GSL (INDIA) LIMITED REGD. OFFICE & WORKS: GSL House, Plot No. 56 Village: AMLETHA Road No. 17 MIDC Taluka: NANDOD Andheri(E), Bombay-400093 Dist.: BHARUCH Tel.: 8215936/37/39/40 Phone: Rajpipla (02640)20232 Fax: (022) 8215944 Tix.: 011-79434 GSL IN Ret No. Date: (By DHL) June 12, 1996 M/s Apollo Finance Ltd. 5th Floor, Hemkunt Tower 98, Nehru Place New Delhi- 110019 Kind Attn. : Mr. Sanjeev Varma Dear Sir, Sub: ICD Facility for ₹ 25.00 lacs. Please find enclosed herewith the following documents: 1. Demand Draft No. 583624 dated 11.06.96 for  .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r-corporate loan of ₹ 25 Lakhs at 31% interest and promised to repay the loan amount within 90 days. The accused persons while obtaining aforesaid loan dishonestly concealed the factum of winding up proceeding of Accused Company and induced complainant to part with his huge amount. 15. On the basis of the evidence on the record, complaint by the Complainant and statement of CW1 Navneet Prabhakar (AR of the Complainant Company) the Court below took cognizance under Section 420/34 IPC and summoned the Accused persons. The Summoning Order in C.C. No. 69A/1 dated 26.04.2003 is reproduced as under: - 26/4/2003 Pt: Comptt. in person with cl. I have heard arg. I have perused, the record carefully. I have also gone through the statement of CW .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||