2009 (2) TMI 871 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to order discharging accused in Criminal Complaint Case u/s 138 of NI Act, interpretation of MOU terms, applicability of judgment in Venkatesh Dutt v. M/s. MS Shoes East Limited, relevance of subsequent judgment in Lalit Kumar Sharma & Anr v. State of UP V (2008) SLT 1.

Interpretation of MOU terms:
- Complaint filed for dishonour of cheque under NI Act.
- Parties entered into MOU for settlement.
- MOU stipulated payment terms and consequences of dishonour.
- Post-dated cheques issued as per MOU.
- Complaint not disposed of based on MOU.
- Accused filed for acquittal citing Venkatesh Dutt judgment.
- Petitioner argued MOU failure due to dishonoured cheques.
- Court considered clause 5 of MOU and Venkatesh Dutt judgment.
- Petitioner sought discharge based on MOU terms.

Applicability of Venkatesh Dutt judgment:
- Venkatesh Dutt case involved compromise during complaint.
- Cheques issued post-compromise dishonoured.
- Court held fresh cause of action for each dishonoured cheque.
- Multiple complaints maintainable for each dishonoured cheque.
- Petitioner argued Venkatesh Dutt judgment outdated.
- Petitioner sought revival of original complaint based on MOU terms.

Relevance of Lalit Kumar Sharma judgment:
- Lalit Kumar Sharma case involved loan repayment cheques.
- Compromise reached during complaint proceedings.
- Subsequent cheques dishonoured, new accused added.
- Supreme Court held second complaint not maintainable.
- Second cheque not towards original liability.
- Second complaint misconceived, appeal allowed.
- Petitioner argued Lalit Kumar Sharma judgment supersedes Venkatesh Dutt.
- Court agreed, set aside MM's order, revived original complaint.

Conclusion:
- Court found Venkatesh Dutt judgment outdated.
- Lalit Kumar Sharma judgment deemed relevant.
- Original complaint revived based on MOU terms.
- Matter to proceed before MM as per law.
- Petition disposed of, order for revival issued.