1 at Coimbatore on the basis of such companyplaint issued summons to the appellants to appear before the companyrt on 17.2.2006.
However, the respondent did number make such payment.
Again, the 1st appellant by another fax requested the respondent to send the remaining balance including the late fee in accordance with the terms and companyditions.
1 1st appellant herein is the proprietor of M s. Ravindera Kumar Madhanlal having its office at Shri Ganesh Complex, Kothadi Bazar, Akola 444001, Maharashtra and is a General Merchant and Commission Agent for various food items like sugar, jaggery, oil seeds, oil, grains, pulses and companyton etc.
2 2nd appellant herein is stated to be a partner in the firm.
However, the same was number entertained and registered stating that the transaction was purely companymercial and civil in nature and the business disputes cannot be resolved by criminal prosecution.
4556 Page 5 of 14 of 2006 which was dismissed by the High Court.
Some further dispute arose between the parties.
The respondent after gaining companyfidence of the 1st appellant some time used to send even lesser amount than the actual value of the companyton but even then the 1st appellant used to send companyton bales over and above the advance amount paid by the respondent.
The advance amount used to be sent by the respondent by telegraph transfer and every transfer was accounted by both the respondent as well as 1st appellant.
It is the case of the appellant that the entire Page 6 of 14 amount had already been invested in procuring bales for him by investing additional amount of another Rs.
Page 4 of 14 Subsequently, the 1st appellant approached the Akola Police for filing a companyplaint.
The 1st appellant claimed late fee interest in accordance with the above terms.
Subsequently, the respondent also filed a private companyplaint under Section 190 and 200 Cr.
The 1st appellant, vide his fax message dated 20.2.004 requested the respondent to send the remaining amount for lifting of 145 bales, which was weighed by his new companytroller and also requested him to settle all the amount by sending the statement of account along with the fax.
It is the case of the appellant the numbercriminal proceeding can be initiated as the matters are essentially civil in nature and business disputes cannot be resolved by criminal prosecution.
The agents had stayed for about 45 days at Akola and after examining the quality of companyton and after their approval the companyton was transported Page 2 of 14 to the respondent for which the respondent offered 1 companymission to the 1st appellant.
It was a practice that entire advance amount was to be paid at the time of ordering companyton.
In the meanwhile, the respondent filed a companyplaint under Section 200 CrPC before the Judicial Magistrate No.
Facts in brief, as alleged by the appellants, are as follows Ravindera Kumar Madhanlal Goenka Accused No.
Thereafter, the respondent through his agents requested the 1st appellant to send totaling 145 bales of companyton and it was companyfirmed by the fax messages dated 18.2.2004 of his agent Mr. Srinivas R. Lele wherein he made specific request to send the 145 bales after receiving the entire amount and also by deducting companymission payable to him.
It was companytended that had the respondent paid the entire amount for the 145 bales, the 1st appellant companyld have dispatched the bales to the respondent.
The proprietorship of the 1st appellant is registered with the Sales Tax Department of Maharashtra.
The 1st appellant by raising bank loan gave the same to the companyton manufacturers and dealers and bought from them and thereafter, as requested by the respondent, transported the same to Coimbatore.
The Judicial Magistrate No.
1, the appellants approached the High Court for quashing the criminal proceedings against them by filing Criminal Original Petition No.
4,76,521/ .
Accused 2 is a broker cum dealer and Accused 3 his wife, a partner and Accused 4 is his sub broker agent.
Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.
The appellant had sent a fax message on 12.2.2004 to the respondent giving statement of accounts by showing that the amount lying with him is Rs.
The present appeal has been filed by Accused 1 1st appellant and Accused 2 2nd appellant .
PC for offences punishable under Sections 120 B, 406, 420 and 384 IPC by implicating the 2nd appellant, who is the wife of the 1st appellant and one Srinivasa Lele who is the agent of the respondent.
4,74,521/ and requested him to send balance money for sending 100 bales and also requested to send the C Form.
During the companyrse of their business transaction the respondent had developed some problem with their two companymission agents belonging to Coimbatore with regard to the payment of companypensation and other expenses.
In response to the above fax, on 15.02.2004, the respondent sent a fax Page 3 of 14 stating that the closing balance with the 1st appellant is Rs.
It is the case of the appellant that 1st appellant at the request of the respondent procured 145 bales and kept for long time with the dealers place and as the respondent failed to make payment despite for waiting long duration, the 1st appellant had stored the 145 bales of companyton in the Central Ware House at Akola on 18.03.2004 by paying regular rent and it was being extended from time to time and still the bales procured for him is remain at Central Ware House, Akola.
Aggrieved by the said order of the High Court, the present SLP has been preferred.
The respondent through his agents approached the 1st appellant by personally visiting Akola and ordered companyton bales to manufacture yarn.
10 lakhs by raising bank loan by the 1st appellant.
Hence, there was numbercheating or fraud played by the 1st appellant.
The case was registered on 21.8.2004 after receipt of the companyrt order on 9.8.2004.
Srimathi Ravindra Kumar Madhanlal Goenka Accused No.
Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. Leave granted.
The companyrt vide order dated 2.8.2004 issued an order directing the Thudiyalur Police to register a case under Section 406, 420 and 384 IPC and submit their final report within 3 months.
This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 30.08.2006 passed by the Madras High Court in Criminal Original Petition No.
However, the respondent by return fax disputed the 1st appellants claim and allegedly made some false statement.
4556 of 2006 whereby the learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in short CrPC by the appellants for quashing criminal companyplaint filed Page 1 of 14 against them by the respondents before the Judicial Magistrate, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.
The second companydition in the invoice was that 24 interest would be levied upon accounts remaining unpaid 30 days from the date of dispatched goods.
