M/S Expovan Registered Partnership Firm Vs Mr Rajesh S/O Satyanarayana Hegde

M/S. EXPOVAN REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FIRM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, DR. R MAHENDRAN, AGE. 59 YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O: OFFICE AT, SF NO. 42/43, VAKKADIPALAYAM ROAD, R PONNAPURAM, POLLACHI 642002, COIMBATORE DISTRICT, STATE OF TAMIL NADU.

¶11

… PETITIONER

¶12

(BY SRI. ANIL KALE, ADVOCATE)

¶13

YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR

¶14

Digitally signed by YASHAVANT NARAYANKAR Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD

¶15

AND:

¶16

MR. RAJESH S/O. SATYANARAYANA HEGDE, AGE 52 YEARS, OCC: PROPRIETOR OF THE FIRM “ORCID”, R/O: ORCID, BHAGAT SINGH ROAD, SIRSI 581401, DIST. UTTAR KANNADA.

¶17

…RESPONDENT

¶18

(BY SRI. SOURABH HEDGE, ADVOCATE)

¶19

THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.P.C., SEEKING TO ALLOW THIS PETITION AND QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN CC NO.37/2024 (IN PCR NO.4/2024) PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRL.CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, SIRSI FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-K.

¶20

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

2 -

¶22

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9804 CRL.P No. 100749 of 2024

¶23

HC-KAR

¶24

ORAL ORDER

¶25

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY)

¶26

The petitioner who is accused in C.C. No. 37 of 2024 pending before the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Sirsi, registered for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act, is before this Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings in the aforesaid case registered against him.

¶27

Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and a joint memo is filed today reporting the settlement.

¶28

The submission and the joint memo are taken on

¶29

record.

¶30

The joint memo filed by the parties, which is signed by the respective parties and their advocates, reads as follows:

¶31

3 -

¶32

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9804 CRL.P No. 100749 of 2024

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

“JOINT MEMO

¶35

The petitioner and respondent most respectfully submit as under:

¶36

The petitioner and respondent have agreed to settle the above said case hence presenting this joint memo. It is submitted that by virtue of the interim order granted by this Hon'ble Court dated 26.02.2024, the petitioner has deposited an amount of Rs 26,00,000/- before this court on 22.03.2024, without admitting the labiality i.e. claim made by the respondent in his compliant before the trial court. Now in terms of this settlement the petitioner has no objection to release the said amount in deposit in favor of the respondent in the event this Hon'ble Court quashing the impugned proceedings, and further the respondent has agreed and he has no objection to quash the proceedings, however it is also agreed by the parties that the settlement arrived at in this case is restricted only to this case and this settlement arrived at do not amount an admission for any other liability or instrument.

¶37

Wherefore, this Hon'ble court may be pleased to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 37/2024 (PCR No 4/2024) pending on the file of Prl Civil Judge & JMFC, Sirsi for the offence punishable Under Section 138 Of Negotiable Instruments Act, in the interest of justice and equity”

¶38

5. In view of the settlement between the parties

¶39

and the joint memo now filed by them, the prayer made in

¶40

the petition needs to be granted. Accordingly, the following:

¶41

ORDER

¶42

(i) The criminal petition is allowed;

¶43

4 -

¶44

NC: 2025:KHC-D:9804 CRL.P No. 100749 of 2024

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

(ii) The entire proceedings in C.C. No.37 of 2024 (PCR No.4/2024) pending before the Court of Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Sirsi registered for the offences punishable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act stands quashed.

¶47

(iii) The amount in deposit before this Court is permitted to be withdrawn by the respondent-complainant after due verification.

¶48

(iv) In light of the disposal of the petition, pending applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and are accordingly disposed of.

¶49

Sd/(S.VISHWAJITH SHETTY) JUDGE

¶50

VNP / CT: BCK

¶51

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 59

M/S Expovan Registered Partnership Firm v. Mr Rajesh S/O Satyanarayana Hegde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S Expovan Registered Partnership Firm v. Mr Rajesh S/O Satyanarayana Hegde

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Akash S/O Chandrahas Naik Vs State of Karnataka

Sidram Atmaram Kamble Vs the State of Karnataka

Vajendrachar Alias Vajendra Rao Kulkarni Vs the State of Karnataka

Nandini W/O Nagesh Dumale Vs the State of Karnataka

Shri. Ladjisab S/O Gajabarsab Multani, Vs the State of Karnataka

Prajwal S/O Shivakumar Hiremath Vs the State of Karnataka