9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in terms of reasonable amount against each cheque, but gap between offered amount and due amount is very high, prima facie appears to be beyond the scope of negotiation also. In present criminal cases offence under NI Act has been committed years before prior to the introduction of OTS Scheme. For offence already committed years before cannot be automatically compounded as a matter of resolution of the Scheme as a matter of right. Compliance of Scheme is sincere and utmost duty of officer of Corporation, offer of petitioner can be accepted only if that tallies with the provisions of Scheme and should be in consonance with the amount due in each and every case on the basis of amount and date of cheque and date of bounce vis-a-vis date of offer. Continuation of criminal proceedings will not be miscarriage of justice. Corporation cannot be forced to accept the offer of amount, which, according to them, is not as per the OTS Scheme of 2007. Interest of justice would be served if amount of each and every bounced cheque should be paid back to the Corporation as per agreement/as per policy observing on the line as has been given in JIK. Industries case (2012 (2) TMI 269 - SUPREME C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ount shall be paid within 15 days and Corporation will issue No Objection Certificate. 6. Petitioner had submitted cheques of ₹ 25 lacs in each case payable at Punjab National Bank for settlement of the dispute with Corporation but Corporation had accepted the cheques but did not accept the proposal and declined the NOC also. After entertaining the proposal at initial stage, Corporation started imposing it's own conditions and discouraged the OTS. On 21/11/2012 with the efforts of State Legal Services Authority, the respondent was requested to show their concern to settle the court matters in Lok Adalat after settlement of amount and account. 7. According to petitioner in pursuance of OTS policy, petitioner is keen and ready to repay the cheque amount of each of the criminal case pending in the court of JMFC. Placing reliance on 2010 (5) SCC 663 (Damodar S Prabhu Vs. Sayed Babalal H ), learned counsel submitted that according to guidelines in supra, petitioner wants to resolve the dispute but respondent Corporation is declining the proposal on whims of some officials that too in utter disregard of OTS Scheme and is allowing litigation to remain pending since more th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , such compounding may be allowed on the condition that the accused pays 15% of the cheque amount by way of costs. (d) Finally, if the application for compounding is made before the Supreme Court, the figure would increase to 20% of the cheque amount. 8. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that if guidelines issued in Damodar case are taken into consideration in spirit, any case under NI Act can be and should be compounded if cheque amount has been refunded along with 20% more amount to the complainant. 9. Per Contra learned counsel for Corporation/respondent submits that OTS Policy has been framed by State of M.P, Department of Commerce Industries on 16/05/2007, which is not applicable to the profit making financially sound companies like petitioner. For repayment of amount Company issued post dated cheques, but did not take any interest in refund of money and earning huge interest on it for last about more than 10 years. Each applications of petitioner that was submitted by Company along with cheque of ₹ 25 lacs was considered by the Board of Directors of the Corporation in its meeting held on 09/03/2011. Proposal was not found in consonance with the policy, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osit is ₹ 1475 lacs as per agreement rate of interest 18% per annum, hence on 31/12/2013 amount will become 18,933.30 lacs. Liability of petitioner has been worked out by Corporation in letter (Annexure R-5) dated 04/01/2014 which reads as below:- The position of your dues as on 31/12/2013 is as under:- Date of ICD ICD Amount Rate of Interest Due date ICD OD Interest OD Total dues as on 31/12/13 24/11/1998 125 18 21.03.01 125 1342.83 1467.83 24/11/1998 300 18 01/12/01 300 3818.75 41118.75 13/01/1999 200 18 06/01/02 200 2478.24 2678.24 25/01/199 100 18 03/08/02 100 1320.81 1420.81 06/12/99 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s offence under NI Act has been committed years before prior to the introduction of OTS Scheme. For offence already committed years before cannot be automatically compounded as a matter of resolution of the Scheme as a matter of right. Compliance of Scheme is sincere and utmost duty of officer of Corporation, offer of petitioner can be accepted only if that tallies with the provisions of Scheme and should be in consonance with the amount due in each and every case on the basis of amount and date of cheque and date of bounce vis-a-vis date of offer. 15. Continuation of criminal proceedings will not be miscarriage of justice. Corporation cannot be forced to accept the offer of amount, which, according to them, is not as per the OTS Scheme of 2007. Interest of justice would be served if amount of each and every bounced cheque should be paid back to the Corporation as per agreement/as per policy observing on the line as has been given in JIK. Industries case (supra). Relief of quashment of criminal complaints filed under section 138 NI Act cannot be granted under inherent powers of this Court, rather it is expected of the trial court that all such pending criminal cases should be di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
