Dismissed

M/S.Inox Wind Limited v. Surface Transport Carriers of India

Madras HC3 Nov 2023CRL OP/2943/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a Criminal Original Petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court held that since the petitioners failed to settle the cheque amount despite the respondent's willingness, quashing was not warranted, and the matter should be resolved in the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed; proceedings in C.C.No.4069 of 2019 not quashed; connected miscellaneous petitions closed.

M/S.Inox Wind Limited Vs Surface Transport Carriers of India — Cheque Dishonour | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 03.11.2023

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021

¶7

and

¶8

Crl.M.P.Nos.1661 and 1662 of 2021

¶9

M/s Inox Wind Limited,

¶10

registered Office at: Plot No.1, Khasra Nos.264 to 267 Industrial Area Village Basal Una Himachal Pradesh-174 303

¶11

India

¶12

represented by Kalyan Ghosh

¶13

Devansh Jain

¶14

Managing Director M/s Inox Wind Limited

¶15

Shanti Prasad Jain Director M/s Inox Wind Limited

¶16

Bindu Saxena Director

¶17

M/s Inox Wind Limited

¶18

Venkatanarayanan Sankaranarayanan Director

¶19

M/s Inox Wind Limited

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Page 1 of 5

¶22

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021

¶23

Narayan Lodha Director M/s Inox Wind Limited

¶24

Deepak Banga Director M/s Inox Wind Limited ... Petitioners

¶25

-Vs-

¶26

Surface Transport Carriers of India Bhavani Purushothaman represented by her Power of Attorney Chandrasekar

¶27

... Respondent

¶28

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C to call for the records in C.C.No.4069 of 2019 pending on file of the Ld. FTC-III, Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and quash the same.

¶29

For Petitioners : Mr.P.Abhishek for Mr.Thriyambak

¶30

For Respondent : Mr.A.M.Elango

¶31

ORDER

¶32

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed calling for the records in C.C.No.4069 of 2019 pending on file of the Learned FTC-III, Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai and to quash the same.

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel

¶34

for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

Page 2 of 5

¶37

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021

¶38

The respondent is the complainant and he lodged a complaint for the

¶39

offence under Section 138 of NI Act.

¶40

The crux of the complaint is that the petitioners and the respondent had entered into a business from the year 2017 for transportation of parts of Wind Operated Electricity Generator. For supply of the materials, the respondent raised invoices to the value of Rs.2,26,70,000/-, by way of 14 invoices on various dates from February 2017-March 2018. The accused also acknowledged the invoices and towards the settlement of part payment, they had issued cheque. The cheque was presented for collection. However, it was returned for the reason "Payment Stopped by Drawer". After causing statutory notice, the respondent initiated proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

¶41

There are totally 13 accused, in which the petitioners are arrayed as A1, A2, A6, A9, A10 to A13. The only ground raised by the petitioners is that when they are willing and ready to settle the cheque amount, the respondent is refusing to receive the amount. Therefore, pending this quash petition, this matter has been referred before the Mediation. Even then the petitioners failed

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 3 of 5

¶43

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021

¶44

to settle the amount when the respondent is very much ready and willing to

¶45

receive the amount. Even till today, the petitioners failed to settle the amount. Therefore, mere pendency of this petition would not serve any purpose, since no ground is raised to quash the proceedings. If at all the petitioners want to settle the amount, they can very well settle before the Trial Court.

¶46

6. In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.4069 of 2019 pending on file of the Learned FTC-III, Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

¶47

Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

¶48

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶49

03.11.2023

¶50

Internet: Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order mn

¶51

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 4 of 5

¶52

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021

¶53

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J,

¶54

¶55

¶56

The FTC-III, Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai.

¶57

Crl.O.P.No.2943 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos.1661 and 1662 of 2021

¶58

03.11.2023

¶59

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5 of 5

M/S.Inox Wind Limited v. Surface Transport Carriers of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Inox Wind Limited v. Surface Transport Carriers of India

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Tagore Educational Trust- Vs the Tamil Nadu Pollution

T.R. Pachamuthu @ Paari Vs S.Mukanchand Bothra

J.Sabura Vs State Rep by

Vijay Anand Vs State by

Rajaram Vs State Rep.by

M.Dinesh Babu Vs the State Rep.by Its