9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Maintainability of a criminal complaint under section 630 of the Companies Act against a former employee. 2. Abuse of process of law and interference in civil litigation. 3. Interpretation of section 630 of the Companies Act regarding ex-employees' liability. Analysis: 1. The petitioner, a former employee, was in possession of company quarters and faced a criminal complaint under section 630 of the Companies Act. The petitioner argued the complaint was not maintainable as she was a tenant paying rent, and civil litigation regarding the property was ongoing. The respondent contended the petitioner unlawfully retained possession after resignation. The court held the complaint was valid, citing precedents allowing prosecution of ex-employees for wrongful withholding of company property under section 630. 2. The petitioner alleged abuse of process and interference in civil matters due to the criminal complaint. The respondent claimed the petitioner unlawfully occupied the premises despite court orders to vacate. The court noted the ongoing civil disputes but upheld the complaint's validity, emphasizing the ex-employee's continuous possession and alleged wrongful withholding of company property. 3. The court analyzed the applicability of section 630 to ex-employees retaining possession of company premises. It referred to precedents from the Bombay High Court, establishing liability for wrongful withholding of company property even after employment cessation. The court concluded that the complaint against the petitioner, who had not vacated the quarters for about eight years, was valid under section 630, and interference was unwarranted. In summary, the court dismissed the petitioner's application to quash the criminal complaint under section 630 of the Companies Act, ruling in favor of the respondent based on the petitioner's continuous possession of company quarters post-employment, citing legal precedents supporting ex-employees' liability for wrongful withholding of company property.
|
