No authorisation for complaint in cheque bounce case, says HC
Delhi HC has ruled that trial courts cannot dismiss a complaint merely on the ground that the complainant did not have proper authorisation from his superiors, reports Harish V Nair.india Updated: Oct 30, 2006 04:46 IST
Streamlining the recovery process for finance companies in cheque bounce cases, Delhi High Court has ruled that trial courts cannot dismiss a complaint merely on the ground that the complainant did not have proper authorization from his superiors.
“Improper authorisation shall not become a hurdle and any person can set a criminal law in motion. The only criteria prescribed by its Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is that the payee or holder must institute the complaint.”, Justice SN Aggarwal said
The judge gave the ruling while setting aside a metropolitan magistrate's order dismissing a case related to the bouncing of a cheque on the ground that the complainant had no authorisation from his superiors for filing the complaint.
Bhasin Credit Aid Ltd had filed an appeal in the High Court, challenging the dismissal order passed by the magistrate on a complaint filed by the company's accounts manager M L Sharma under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Sharma had dragged Raj Kumar to the court for issuing a cheque that bounced. Though he filed the complaint on behalf of the company with the consent of its board of directors, the magistrate dismissed it on the ground that there was no proper written authorisation for it.
Notice over fake electronic items
The Delhi High Court has restrained traders from manufacturing and selling duplicate electronic items, particularly audio equipment, under the popular brand name 'Ahuja', The court said the practice amounts to infrigement of trademark right bestowed with a popular company. The ex-parte interim order was passed by Justice HR Malhotra on a suit filed by Ahuja Radio.
First Published: Oct 30, 2006 04:46 IST