Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2019 (9) TMI 481

..... oner alongwith R.C. Bagrodia and B.K. Ametha represented Accused Company and approached the complainant in June 1996 at Complainant's Registered Office in New Delhi and requested the complainant for inter-corporate deposit of ₹ 25 Lakhs and did not disclose the fact that the Accused Company has already undergone into winding up proceedings. However, they misrepresented the fact that the Accused Company is financially sound and the 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 .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... concealing of the material fact before obtaining loan amounting to ₹ 25,00,000/- at 31% p.a. on 8th June 1996 from the complainant. 3. Present petitioner (Accused No.4) alongwith Accused No.2 and 3 in the month of June, 1996 approached the complainant at its registered office at New Delhi and requested the complainant for intercorporate deposit loan of ₹ 25,00,000/- and accused persons expressly agreed to pay interest at 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 Acc .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... er was made Director of the accused Company on 30.12.1997 and he resigned from the said position on 31.12.2000. Therefore, petitioner was not a Director of the Accused Company on the date when the loan was taken or on the date when the cheque was given or on the date when the cheque was deposited or on the date when the cheque was dishonored and not on the date of issuance of the legal notice under Section 138 of N.I. Act. However, the 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 furn .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... at Accused Company is already undergoing winding up proceedings. Said fact was dishonestly and willfully concealed from complainant and complainant was induced to part with his huge sum of money, thus Accused Persons played fraud on the complainant by cheating it. 11. The essential ingredients of cheating under Section 420 of IPC is as under: (i) There must be Deception. (ii) Accused must induce a person by said deception. (iii) That 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 Andhe .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

..... (AR of the Complainant Company) on 30.11.2002 who specifically stated in his statement that Accused Company through Accused Persons i.e. Accused No.2 Sh. R.C. Bagrodia, Managing Director, M/s GSL (India) Ltd., Accused No.3 Sh. B.K. Ametha, Joint Managing Director, M/s GSL (India) Ltd. and Accused No.4 (present petitioner) Sh. M.C. Jain, Director, M/s GSL (India) Ltd. approached complainant in month of June 1996 and requested for inter-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 .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| 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.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||