9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (3) TMI 1463X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... offee Day, represented by its Directors, whereas the word Global is missing. In order to substantiate the contention of the respondent, learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court that Annexure-A notice was issued against a juristic person i.e., M/s. Caf Coffee Day Global Limited and the specific averments are made against the representative of the Company i.e., its Directors and Authorized Signatories. It is also important to note that the notice was acknowledged and reply was given by M/s Caf Coffee Day, but in the reply, the only dispute raised is with regard to the recipient Nos.5, 7, 8 and 9 stating that they are irrelevant parties. However, recipient No.5 is not a Director and others are not directly connected to M/s. Caf Coffee Day Global Limited and they are not aware of recipient No.5. Having perused the reply notice, it clearly depicts that they made part payment of Rs. 12 lakhs to the complainant and now, only on the ground of technicality, the petitioners cannot contend that a juristic person is not made as a party to the proceedings. Annexure-C discloses that the rejoinder was given to the reply notice at Annexure-B and so also Annexure D was given to M/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The complaint is filed by the Power of Attorney Holder and no averment is made in the complaint that the Power of Attorney Holder is having knowledge about the transaction. The cheque is signed by Lakshman for M/s. Coffee Day Global Limited and the complaint does not disclose that the Power of Attorney Holder is having the knowledge of the same. The sworn statement constitutes an affidavit but the said affidavit filed by the complaint is also defective. The documents are also not exhibited by the Trial Court before issuance of the process against the petitioners herein. 4. Learned counsel in support of his arguments relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of A.C. NARAYANAN V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER reported in 2013 AIR SCW 6807 wherein at para 15, the points that came up for consideration before the Apex Court were:- (i) Whether a Power of Attorney Holder can sign and file a complaint petition on behalf of the complainant?/ Whether the eligibility criteria prescribed by Section 142(a) of NI Act would stand satisfied if the complaint petition itself is filed in the name of the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque? (ii) Whether a Power of Attorne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer of Attorney Holder for having knowledge of the facts and the affidavit is also defective and hence, there cannot be any order of taking cognizance against the petitioners herein. 7. Learned counsel for the respondent, in support of his arguments, would vehemently contend that out of 17 cheques, only 6 cheques were presented and M/s. Caf Coffee Day is the division of the juristic person. Learned counsel also would vehemently content that Section 12 of the Companies Act is clear that the registered office of the Company is a party to the proceedings and hence, the same is mentioned in the complaint. The registered office is capable of receiving and acknowledging all communications and notices as may be addressed to it. Learned counsel referring to the same, would vehemently contend that notice was issued against a juristic person itself and the petitioners herein, while giving reply, have not disputed the issuance of cheques. In the reply, the issuance of cheques has been admitted and also the part payment in terms of Annexure-B. The petitioners have also sought time, when the notice was given and now they cannot contend that a juristic person is not made as a party to the compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the accused herein i.e., accused Nos.1 to 10. The copy of the notice issued against all the Directors are also produced before the Court. 11. Having taken note of the averment made in para Nos.5 and 6, it is clear that these accused persons were in the realm of affairs of the Company and also the specific pleading is made that they were in charge of day-to-day affairs of the Company. It is to be noted that in para No.5 of the complaint, a categorical allegation has been made that the accused persons collectively took a decision to clear the liability and convinced the complainant to accept the post dated cheques. Learned counsel for the petitioners also not disputed the issuance of the cheques and so also the cheques being dishonoured. 12. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent also brought to the notice of this Court that in the sworn statement, the Power of Attorney Holder has categorically stated that he is the authorized Power of Attorney Holder of the complainant and he was authorized to file the complaint on behalf of the complainant. In para No.1, the Power of Attorney Holder has categorically stated that he knew the facts of the case and has been authorized to sw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al of the complaint, it discloses that the same is filed against M/s Caf Coffee Day, represented by its Directors, whereas the word Global is missing. In order to substantiate the contention of the respondent, learned counsel also brought to the notice of this Court that Annexure-A notice was issued against a juristic person i.e., M/s. Caf Coffee Day Global Limited and the specific averments are made against the representative of the Company i.e., its Directors and Authorized Signatories. It is also important to note that the notice was acknowledged and reply was given by M/s Caf Coffee Day, but in the reply, the only dispute raised is with regard to the recipient Nos.5, 7, 8 and 9 stating that they are irrelevant parties. However, recipient No.5 is not a Director and others are not directly connected to M/s. Caf Coffee Day Global Limited and they are not aware of recipient No.5. It is further pertinent to note that in para No.2 of the said reply, they have not disputed the supply of coffee beans to their Company, but an averment is made with regard to the payments for supply of coffee beans in the year 2019, though the complainant is well aware of the situation that their Company, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
