Dismissed
Mukesh Goel and Anr. v. M/S Euro Containers
Punjab & Haryana HCCRM-M/20950/2011
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND…
What the court decided
AI extract
of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM M 20950 of 2011 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRM M 20950 of 2011 Date of decision: 16.02.2012
Mukesh Goel and another ........ Petitioners
Versus
M/s Euro Containers .......Respondent(s)
Coram: Hon'ble Ms Justice Nirmaljit Kaur
-.-
Present: Mr.Rakesh Verma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Indresh Goel, Advocate for the respondent
-.-
Nirmaljit Kaur, J. (Oral)
Prays for quashing of the complaint No. 276 dated 26.07.2005 under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 titled as M/s Euro Containers V. Delta Insecticides Limited and another pending in the Court of Shri Parminder Singh, JMIC, Chandigarh and the summoning order dated 26.07.2005.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondent states that the matter has been compromised and the said complaint stands withdrawn. Learned counsel for the respondent also states that, in case, the said complaint is not withdrawn, the same shall be withdrawn.
CRM M 20950 of 2011 2
In view of the statement made by learned counsel for the respondent, the present petition stands dismissed as having become
infructuous.
(Nirmaljit Kaur) Judge
16.02.2012 mohan
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petition for quashing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act 1881 is maintainable when the complaint has been withdrawn.
Whether the present petition stands dismissed having become infructuous.
Mukesh Goel
M/s Euro Containers
Nirmaljit Kaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court