High Court Kerala High Court

M/S.City Man Clothings India Ltd vs Muhammed Ashraf on 5 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
M/S.City Man Clothings India Ltd vs Muhammed Ashraf on 5 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL.A.No. 883 of 2003()


1. M/S.CITY MAN CLOTHINGS INDIA LTD.,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. MUHAMMED ASHRAF, DIRECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.R.PRAVEEN

                For Respondent  :SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :05/06/2009

 O R D E R
                        M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                  Crl. Appeal NO. 883    OF 2003
                 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
            Dated this the 5th day of June, 2009.

                         J U D G M E N T

This appeal is preferred against the order of acquittal

passed in S.T.3140/99 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate-

III, Kottayam. It is a case u/s 138 of the N.I.Act and the

complaint is filed by the power of attorney holder of the

Managing Director of the firm. It is the case that in discharge

of the liability a cheque had been issued which when presented

for encashment returned with the endorsement of insufficiency

of funds thereafter complying with the statutory requirements

action had been initiated u/s 138. The Court below acquitted

the accused on the ground that the person who has filed the

complaint did not have the power to do so in the absence of

showing that he is competent to represent the Company on

the basis of the power of attorney produced by him.

2. When the matter came up for hearing today

Crl.M.A. No.5391/09 has been filed u/s 391 of Cr.P.C. with a

Crl.A. 883 OF 2003
-2-

request to consider the extract of the resolution which

authorised the Managing Director to execute the power of

attorney. I do not want to say anything on the correctness of

the same at this stage for the reason that it is only a

photocopy that is available before me. The learned counsel for

the respondent contends before me it is a paramount duty of

the appellant to produce that document if it was there before

the trial court and therefore no chance need be given. The

transaction involved in the case is for 5 lakhs. The power of

attorney is produced. Now, it is a technical defence. True, if it

is sustainable the complaint has to be thrown out. But if it is

not so, it has to be entertained and there are innumerable

number of decisions which says that an authorisation or the

power to continue a proceedings even if it is defective at the

inception is curable at a later stage. So in this case if the

document is true even before inception of the complaint there

is a proper authorisation. Therefore I feel an opportunity can

be given to consider the same. Therefore the judgment under

challenge is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the

Crl.A. 883 OF 2003
-3-

trial court for fresh consideration and disposal. The appellant

namely the complainant herein is permitted to produce

necessary documents including the minutes relied upon and

adduce sufficient evidence necessary in support of its

contentions. Needless to say, the accused is also entitled to

raise all the contentions and if necessary all documentary

evidence in support of its contentions. The Court shall dispose

of the matter afresh in accordance with law and the parties are

directed to appear before the Court on 14.7.09.

M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE.

ul/-

Crl.A. 883 OF 2003
-4-

M.N. KRISHNAN, J.

= = = = = = = = = =
Crl.A. No. 883 OF 2003
= = = = = = = = = = =

J U D G M E N T

5th June, 2009