Sec 142 of ni act
basavaraj shiromani
(Querist) 24 March 2013
This query is : Resolved
A Sugar factory in the year 2008 advanced a sum of Rs: 10,00,000/- to the sugar can cutter as agreed upon. But the cane cutter did not rendered his service as agreed. On 1-1-2009, the sugar factory passed a resolution to take legal action against the cane cutter for violation of the agreement. Ms X was authorized to sign on the concerned papers. Thereafter however the factory succeeded to to take a cheque from cane cutter on 1-1-2010, for Rs: 10,00,000/- which was bounced. The factory lodged a complaint U/s 138 of NI Act through Mr X on the basis of the resolution held on 1-1-2009.
Whether Mr. X is the authorized person to lodge a complaint. When the cheque bounced is the date of offense. But the resolution passed on 10102998 for taking action for the violation of the agreement.
My question is that whether Mr X is a proper and authorized person to lodge a complaint in the name of a factory against the accused for the offense U/s 138 of NI Act ?
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 24 March 2013
The authority provided during the year 2009 for the initiation of the action against the accused cane cutter shall not work during the year 2010 when a new cause of action arose on bouncing of cheque. The question of filing the appeal during the year 2009 was not subject matter before the factory management as the subject cheque was not in their hand at that time.
The authorization is now illegal and thus the complaint is not maintainable and even the right to recover that amount has also gone as 3 years of the date of cheque have also passed.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 26 March 2013
Ms X was authorized to sign on the concerned papers. The factory lodged a complaint U/s 138 of NI Act through Mr X
If Ms X is authorised, Mr X had no authority , so 138 will fail, as no proper person.
Two diff persons.. Ms & Mr.
basavaraj shiromani
(Querist) 27 March 2013
Sir, V.R.Shrop: forgive me, I might have wrote it as Ms instead of Mr. I think you well aware of the facts of my case. Mr X was authorized by resolution to sign on the papers to take legal action for the violation of an agreement. But on the date of passing resolution the cheque was not in the hands of sugar factory. After passing one year however the factory authority succeeded to obtain the cheque from the accused. My question is very clear that, whether on the basis of said resolution of the factory, Mr X can he be deemed as authorized person to file a complaint u/s 138 of NI Act or a separate authorization letter is necessary ?
