138 n.i act complainant query
RASHIM RAJPAL
(Querist) 27 October 2017
This query is : Resolved
HI I AM RASHIM RAJPAL, GENERAL MANAGER OF COMPANY SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD.
I HAVE PUT A COMPLAINT UNDER SECTION 138 N.I ACT TO MR. Y (ACCUSED).
FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS I HAVE FULFILLED-
1. LEGAL NOTICE (SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD VS MR.Y)
2. LEGAL NOTICE POSTAL RECEIPT
3. BOARD RESOLUTION AS I AM THE AUTHORISED SIGNATORY
4.COMPLAINT COPY(SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD VS MR.Y)
5. SIGNED RELEVANT DOCS IN COURT WITH ONE DIRECTOR PRESENT .
6.CHEQUE ORIGINALS
7.MEMO ORIGINAL.
NOW THE MAIN POINT IN THE PETITION/APPEAL THAT MR. Y(ACCUSED) COUNSEL HAS FILED IN OTHER COURT AGAINST OUR COMPANY IS THAT WHEN THE LEGAL NOTICE WAS SERVED IT WAS ONLY WRITTEN SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD AND NOT SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD THROUGH ITS DIRECTORS (A AND B). THAT MEANS THAT COMPANY CANT SEND NOTICE WITHOUT MENTIONING ITS DIRECTOR NAME . (ACCORDING TO Y COUNSEL).
NOW AS BEING THE COMPLAINANT THE LIABILITY IS 11 LAKHS AND IF ANY ONE CAN GIVE ME SUGGESTION OR SEND A JUDGMENT FAVORING THAT THE COMPANY AS BEING THE COMPLAINANT IT IS JUSTIFIED TO GIVE COMPANY NAME ONLY ON THE LEGAL NOTICE AND IN COMPLAINT COPY GIVEN TO JM1C.
I SINCERELY REQUEST FOR A GENUINE SUGGESTION THAT COULD HELP ME IN THIS MATTER.
P. Venu
(Expert) 28 October 2017
The company itself is a legal person and certainly can sue in that capacity.
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 29 October 2017
Company can afford legal advice from lawyer / can contact your law department.
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2017
Well advised by Expert Mr.P.Venu
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2017
The Child RK Goyal is from Karachi and if required could be contacted
RASHIM RAJPAL
(Querist) 29 October 2017
Is it mandatory to give specific assertion of authorised signatory explicitly on the complaint copy or the company name would justify it .?
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2017
You have earlier pointed out about objection in the name of the company, but now have asked about the authorised signatory.
Please indicate, what exactly is your requirement?
.
RASHIM RAJPAL
(Querist) 30 October 2017
Sir , The appeal the accused has filed in which the main point/objection he has given is that the company Siam taiwa sales ltd has not mentioned its directors name or any authorised representative name specifically while sending legal notice and also while submitting complaint to the magistrate. Which is true .The liability is same in book of accounts as on the cheque .
In the complaint copy it is -
SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD, through its counsel(name), PLOT 11, IND AREA PHASE 2 CHANDIGARH being the complainant
VS
SHARIF AHMED PROPRIETOR MOHAMMAD SAIM AND ITS ADDRESS .(accused)
.
Sharif ahmed has issued cheque in favor of SIAM TAIWA SALES LTD .
Thus my concern is that the accused shouldnt get acquittal on behalf of this objection.
Hemant Agarwal
(Expert) 24 November 2017
1. In N.I.Act, the matter against a Co. (accused) has to be filed u/s 138 r/w 141 /142
2. The Matter to be filed has to be in following sequence:
a) co. name .... Accused no. 1
b) Director name .... Accused no. 2
c) Director name .... Accused no. 3
3. It is mandatory that the Signatory director/s and all the "in-charge" directors MUST be made an accused.
4. IF not done above, THEN move revised /amendment application, with the permission of the court.
Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal
P. Venu
(Expert) 24 November 2017
The above requirement, in my considered opinion, need not be necessary when the company the complainant.
Guest
(Expert) 24 November 2017
Is the lawyer appointed by the company a totally ignorant lot, who does not know who should be the main party and who should be the others?
If so, how you can expect to win the case? Better change him without any delay.
Guest
(Expert) 24 November 2017
To be frank, I find no substance in the description of the problem for the experts to make the academic querist understand, what is what of the filing and defending of a case.
If the problem has any reality, the querist may better rely on his lawyer, rather than getting a mixed response here. Else, if unable to rely on him, he may use his option for the change of his awyer.
