Sec 138 Him & Kays.docx
This document was uploaded by user and they confirmed that they have the permission to share it. If you are author or own the copyright of this book, please report to us by using this DMCA report form. Report DMCA
Overview
Download & View Sec 138 Him & Kays.docx as PDF for free.
More details
- Words: 1,872
- Pages: 10
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No.
of 2016
Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd., Village Jarapani, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand) having its Registered Office at 301, Phase-II, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun through its Director Kanika Singh. ……………………Complainant Versus 1.
Mehra Traders,Near Hanuman Temple,RTO Road, KusumKhera,Haldwani, through its Proprietor,Sri Anup Singh Mehra.
2.
Sri Anup Singh Mehra,Prop. Mehra Traders,Near Hanuman TempleRTO Road, KusumKhera,Haldwani. ……………..Opposite Parties P.S. Vasant Vihar. Complaint U/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1886.
Sir,
The above named complainant most respectfully submits as under:-
1)
That opposite party 1 is the sole proprietorship firm of Opposite Party no. 2 and he is authorized and responsible for the all the acts, deeds & omissions done for on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1.
2)
That you Opposite Party No. 2 as proprietor of Opposite Party no. 1, purchased Oak Dew Spring Water 1 litre, 192 cases from the complainant amounting to Rs. 23,060/- against which Bill No. 400 dated 0509.2015 was issued to the opposite parties.
3)
That the opposite parties against the said bill issued following two cheques to the Complainant for which the complainant is holder in due course for consideration:a.
Cheque no.007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11,530/- of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, P.O. Kathgharia, District Nainital.
b. 4)
Cheque no.015070 dated 10.05.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- of Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, Distrit Nainital.
That as per the assurance made by Opposite party No. 2, the complainant produced the said cheques with his Bank, State Bank Of India, PBB Vasant Vihar, Dehradun on 10.05.2016, which were returned by the bank vide memo dated 11.05.2016 of my client unpaid with the following endorsements:a.
Cheque No. 007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ‘02-Exceeds arrangement’.
b.
Cheque No. 015070 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ’01- Funds Insufficient’.
5)
That in this respect it is also pertinent to mention here that earlier also on the assurance of the Opposite Parties, the complainant produced cheques no. 007966 of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, dated 29.03.2016 for Rs. 11,530/- with his bank, which was returned by the Bank with the endorsement “Exceeds Arrangement” on 30.03.2016.
6)
That after which the complainant contacted the Opposite Party No. 2, who assured the complainant to produce both the cheques on 10.05.2016 and he will ensure payment of the same.
7)
That bestowing faith upon the Opposite parties the complainant produced the aforesaid cheques for the second time as stated above.
8)
That thereafter the complainant tired to contact the Opposite Parties, but they gave a deaf ear to the same on which the Complainant through Shri Vaibhav Jain, Advocate send a legal notice dated 23.05.2016 to the opposite parties through Regd. A.D. post.
9)
That however the Opposite Parties malafidely get the said notices returned. In this regard it is pertinent to mention here that the address on which the said notice was send was the address of the office of the Opposite Parties from which he is still working and the same is the last known address of the Opposite Parties in the knowledge of the complainant.
10) That the Opposite Parties has full knowledge of the contents of the said notice and he malafidely so as to harass the complainant has not received the said notice.
11) That the act of the Opposite parties/accused is punishable U/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act. 12) That the cause of action arose under the jurisdiction of this Ld. Court and this Ld. Court has jurisdiction to arose and adjudicate the above complaint. 13) That the complainant has left with no other relief other than to file the present complaint before this Ld. Court. It is therefore most respectfully prayed:1.
The Opposite parties be directed to pay the Complainant the amount of Rs. 23,040/- towards payment due upon you alongwith Rs. 3300/- as cost of the notice alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of raising of bill till payment.
2.
The opposite parties/accused be summoned and penalized U/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act.
3.
The Opposite parties be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 11,000/- as cost of the litigation.
4.
Any other relief as this Ld. Court deems fit and proper in the above circumstances in favor of the complainant and against the Opposite Parties be also granted.
Dated:Dehradun Presented by:Vaibhav Jain, Advocate.
……………………..Complainant through authorized signatory.
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
Affidavit of Mrs. Kanika Singh aged about 42 years W/o Shri Himanshu Singh Panwar C/o Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd., Village Jarapani, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand) having its Registered Office at 301, Phase-II, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby most respectfully submits as under:1.
That the deponent is director in the Complainant Company and is duly authorized to sign and file the present complaint on behalf of the Company and is fully acquainted with the facts deposed to below.
2.
That a complaint U/s 138 NI Act is being moved against the opposite parties alongwith this affidavit. The contents of the same are true and correct and the same are liable to be read and understood as an integral part of this affidavit, which are not being repeated herewith for the sake of brevity.
3.
That the deponent has full hope of success in the present matter. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of para 1 to 3 of the above affidavit are true and correct. Nothing material has been concealed herewith and no part of it is untrue. So help me God. Verified at Dehradun on ………………Deponent
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT 1.
Copy of Resolution of the Board of the complainant Company dated 04.03.2016.
2.
Copy of Bill No. 400, dated 05.09.2015.
3.
Original Cheque no.007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11,530/- of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, P.O. Kathgharia, District Nainital.
4.
Memo of Bank dated 11.05.2016.
5.
Original Cheque no.015070 dated 10.05.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- of Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, Distrit Nainital.
6.
Memo of Bank dated 11.05.2016.
7.
Notice dated 23.05.2016.
8.
Original Postal receipt dated 24.05.2016
9.
Original Postal receipt dated 24.05.2016.
10.
Returned Envelope
11.
Returned Envelope. Dated:Dehradun Presented by:Vaibhav Jain, Advocate.
Counsel for Complainant
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
Affidavit of Mrs. Kanika Singh aged about 42 years W/o Shri Himanshu Singh Panwar C/o Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd., Village Jarapani, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand) having its Registered Office at 301, Phase-II, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby most respectfully submits as under:1.
That the deponent is director in the Complainant Company and is duly authorized to sign and file the present complaint on behalf of the Company and is fully acquainted with the facts deposed to below.
2.
That opposite party 1 is the sole proprietorship firm of Opposite Party no. 2 and he is authorized and responsible for the all the acts, deeds & omissions done for on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1.
3.
That you Opposite Party No. 2 as proprietor of Opposite Party no. 1, purchased Oak Dew Spring Water 1 litre, 192 cases from the complainant amounting to Rs. 23,060/- against which Bill No. 400 dated 0509.2015 was issued to the opposite parties.
4.
That the opposite parties against the said bill issued following two cheques to the Complainant for which the complainant is holder in due course for consideration:a.
Cheque no.007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11,530/- of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, P.O. Kathgharia, District Nainital.
b.
Cheque no.015070 dated 10.05.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- of Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, Distrit Nainital.
5.
That as per the assurance made by Opposite party No. 2, the complainant produced the said cheques with his Bank, State Bank Of India, PBB Vasant Vihar, Dehradun on 10.05.2016, which were returned by the bank vide memo dated 11.05.2016 of my client unpaid with the following endorsements:a.
Cheque No. 007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ‘02-Exceeds arrangement’.
b.
Cheque No. 015070 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ’01- Funds Insufficient’.
6.
That in this respect it is also pertinent to mention here that earlier also on the assurance of the Opposite Parties, the complainant produced cheques no. 007966 of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, dated 29.03.2016 for Rs. 11,530/- with his bank, which was returned by the Bank with the endorsement “Exceeds Arrangement” on 30.03.2016.
7.
That after which the complainant contacted the Opposite Party No. 2, who assured the complainant to produce both the cheques on 10.05.2016 and he will ensure payment of the same.
8.
That bestowing faith upon the Opposite parties the complainant produced the aforesaid cheques for the second time as stated above.
9.
That thereafter the complainant tired to contact the Opposite Parties, but they gave a deaf ear to the same on which the Complainant through Shri Vaibhav Jain, Advocate send a legal notice dated 23.05.2016 to the opposite parties through Regd. A.D. post.
10.
That however the Opposite Parties malafidely get the said notices returned. In this regard it is pertinent to mention here that the address on which the said notice was send was the address of the office of the Opposite Parties from which he is still working and the same is the last known address of the Opposite Parties in the knowledge of the complainant.
11.
That the Opposite Parties has full knowledge of the contents of the said notice and he malafidely so as to harass the complainant has not received the said notice.
12.
That the complainant has left with no other relief other than to file the present complaint before this Ld. Court.
13.
That the complaint of the complainant is liable to be allowed with all reliefs claimed. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of para 1 to 13 of the above affidavit are true and correct. Nothing material has been concealed herewith and no part of it is untrue. So help me God. Verified at Dehradun on ………………Deponent
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
LIST OF WITNESSES 1. Mrs. Kanika Singh Director Him &Kays Pvt. Ltd. 2. Branch Manager, Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, Kathgaria, Nainital. 3. Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, District Nainital. 4. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, PBB Vasant Vihar, Dehradun. 5. Post Master, GPO Dehradun. 6. Post Master GPO Nainital. 7. Any other witness is required.
Dated:Dehradun Presented by:Vaibhav Jain, Advocate.
Counsel for Complainant
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd
Versus
of 2016 Mehra Traders &anr. U/s 138 NI Act PS. Vasant Vihar, Dehradun
Sir, For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed alongwith this application it is most respectfully prayed that
of 2016
Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd., Village Jarapani, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand) having its Registered Office at 301, Phase-II, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun through its Director Kanika Singh. ……………………Complainant Versus 1.
Mehra Traders,Near Hanuman Temple,RTO Road, KusumKhera,Haldwani, through its Proprietor,Sri Anup Singh Mehra.
2.
Sri Anup Singh Mehra,Prop. Mehra Traders,Near Hanuman TempleRTO Road, KusumKhera,Haldwani. ……………..Opposite Parties P.S. Vasant Vihar. Complaint U/s 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1886.
Sir,
The above named complainant most respectfully submits as under:-
1)
That opposite party 1 is the sole proprietorship firm of Opposite Party no. 2 and he is authorized and responsible for the all the acts, deeds & omissions done for on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1.
2)
That you Opposite Party No. 2 as proprietor of Opposite Party no. 1, purchased Oak Dew Spring Water 1 litre, 192 cases from the complainant amounting to Rs. 23,060/- against which Bill No. 400 dated 0509.2015 was issued to the opposite parties.
3)
That the opposite parties against the said bill issued following two cheques to the Complainant for which the complainant is holder in due course for consideration:a.
Cheque no.007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11,530/- of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, P.O. Kathgharia, District Nainital.
b. 4)
Cheque no.015070 dated 10.05.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- of Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, Distrit Nainital.
That as per the assurance made by Opposite party No. 2, the complainant produced the said cheques with his Bank, State Bank Of India, PBB Vasant Vihar, Dehradun on 10.05.2016, which were returned by the bank vide memo dated 11.05.2016 of my client unpaid with the following endorsements:a.
Cheque No. 007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ‘02-Exceeds arrangement’.
b.
Cheque No. 015070 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ’01- Funds Insufficient’.
5)
That in this respect it is also pertinent to mention here that earlier also on the assurance of the Opposite Parties, the complainant produced cheques no. 007966 of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, dated 29.03.2016 for Rs. 11,530/- with his bank, which was returned by the Bank with the endorsement “Exceeds Arrangement” on 30.03.2016.
6)
That after which the complainant contacted the Opposite Party No. 2, who assured the complainant to produce both the cheques on 10.05.2016 and he will ensure payment of the same.
7)
That bestowing faith upon the Opposite parties the complainant produced the aforesaid cheques for the second time as stated above.
8)
That thereafter the complainant tired to contact the Opposite Parties, but they gave a deaf ear to the same on which the Complainant through Shri Vaibhav Jain, Advocate send a legal notice dated 23.05.2016 to the opposite parties through Regd. A.D. post.
9)
That however the Opposite Parties malafidely get the said notices returned. In this regard it is pertinent to mention here that the address on which the said notice was send was the address of the office of the Opposite Parties from which he is still working and the same is the last known address of the Opposite Parties in the knowledge of the complainant.
10) That the Opposite Parties has full knowledge of the contents of the said notice and he malafidely so as to harass the complainant has not received the said notice.
11) That the act of the Opposite parties/accused is punishable U/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act. 12) That the cause of action arose under the jurisdiction of this Ld. Court and this Ld. Court has jurisdiction to arose and adjudicate the above complaint. 13) That the complainant has left with no other relief other than to file the present complaint before this Ld. Court. It is therefore most respectfully prayed:1.
The Opposite parties be directed to pay the Complainant the amount of Rs. 23,040/- towards payment due upon you alongwith Rs. 3300/- as cost of the notice alongwith interest @ 24% p.a. from the date of raising of bill till payment.
2.
The opposite parties/accused be summoned and penalized U/s 138 Negotiable Instrument Act.
3.
The Opposite parties be directed to pay an amount of Rs. 11,000/- as cost of the litigation.
4.
Any other relief as this Ld. Court deems fit and proper in the above circumstances in favor of the complainant and against the Opposite Parties be also granted.
Dated:Dehradun Presented by:Vaibhav Jain, Advocate.
……………………..Complainant through authorized signatory.
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
Affidavit of Mrs. Kanika Singh aged about 42 years W/o Shri Himanshu Singh Panwar C/o Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd., Village Jarapani, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand) having its Registered Office at 301, Phase-II, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby most respectfully submits as under:1.
That the deponent is director in the Complainant Company and is duly authorized to sign and file the present complaint on behalf of the Company and is fully acquainted with the facts deposed to below.
2.
That a complaint U/s 138 NI Act is being moved against the opposite parties alongwith this affidavit. The contents of the same are true and correct and the same are liable to be read and understood as an integral part of this affidavit, which are not being repeated herewith for the sake of brevity.
3.
That the deponent has full hope of success in the present matter. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of para 1 to 3 of the above affidavit are true and correct. Nothing material has been concealed herewith and no part of it is untrue. So help me God. Verified at Dehradun on ………………Deponent
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
LIST OF DOCUMENTS FILED ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT 1.
Copy of Resolution of the Board of the complainant Company dated 04.03.2016.
2.
Copy of Bill No. 400, dated 05.09.2015.
3.
Original Cheque no.007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11,530/- of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, P.O. Kathgharia, District Nainital.
4.
Memo of Bank dated 11.05.2016.
5.
Original Cheque no.015070 dated 10.05.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- of Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, Distrit Nainital.
6.
Memo of Bank dated 11.05.2016.
7.
Notice dated 23.05.2016.
8.
Original Postal receipt dated 24.05.2016
9.
Original Postal receipt dated 24.05.2016.
10.
Returned Envelope
11.
Returned Envelope. Dated:Dehradun Presented by:Vaibhav Jain, Advocate.
Counsel for Complainant
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
Affidavit of Mrs. Kanika Singh aged about 42 years W/o Shri Himanshu Singh Panwar C/o Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd., Village Jarapani, Pithoragarh (Uttarakhand) having its Registered Office at 301, Phase-II, Vasant Vihar, Dehradun. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby most respectfully submits as under:1.
That the deponent is director in the Complainant Company and is duly authorized to sign and file the present complaint on behalf of the Company and is fully acquainted with the facts deposed to below.
2.
That opposite party 1 is the sole proprietorship firm of Opposite Party no. 2 and he is authorized and responsible for the all the acts, deeds & omissions done for on behalf of the Opposite Party No. 1.
3.
That you Opposite Party No. 2 as proprietor of Opposite Party no. 1, purchased Oak Dew Spring Water 1 litre, 192 cases from the complainant amounting to Rs. 23,060/- against which Bill No. 400 dated 0509.2015 was issued to the opposite parties.
4.
That the opposite parties against the said bill issued following two cheques to the Complainant for which the complainant is holder in due course for consideration:a.
Cheque no.007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11,530/- of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, P.O. Kathgharia, District Nainital.
b.
Cheque no.015070 dated 10.05.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- of Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, Distrit Nainital.
5.
That as per the assurance made by Opposite party No. 2, the complainant produced the said cheques with his Bank, State Bank Of India, PBB Vasant Vihar, Dehradun on 10.05.2016, which were returned by the bank vide memo dated 11.05.2016 of my client unpaid with the following endorsements:a.
Cheque No. 007966 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ‘02-Exceeds arrangement’.
b.
Cheque No. 015070 dated 29.03.2016 amounting to Rs.11530/- with the endorsement ’01- Funds Insufficient’.
6.
That in this respect it is also pertinent to mention here that earlier also on the assurance of the Opposite Parties, the complainant produced cheques no. 007966 of Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, dated 29.03.2016 for Rs. 11,530/- with his bank, which was returned by the Bank with the endorsement “Exceeds Arrangement” on 30.03.2016.
7.
That after which the complainant contacted the Opposite Party No. 2, who assured the complainant to produce both the cheques on 10.05.2016 and he will ensure payment of the same.
8.
That bestowing faith upon the Opposite parties the complainant produced the aforesaid cheques for the second time as stated above.
9.
That thereafter the complainant tired to contact the Opposite Parties, but they gave a deaf ear to the same on which the Complainant through Shri Vaibhav Jain, Advocate send a legal notice dated 23.05.2016 to the opposite parties through Regd. A.D. post.
10.
That however the Opposite Parties malafidely get the said notices returned. In this regard it is pertinent to mention here that the address on which the said notice was send was the address of the office of the Opposite Parties from which he is still working and the same is the last known address of the Opposite Parties in the knowledge of the complainant.
11.
That the Opposite Parties has full knowledge of the contents of the said notice and he malafidely so as to harass the complainant has not received the said notice.
12.
That the complainant has left with no other relief other than to file the present complaint before this Ld. Court.
13.
That the complaint of the complainant is liable to be allowed with all reliefs claimed. ……………….Deponent I the above named deponent do hereby verify that the contents of para 1 to 13 of the above affidavit are true and correct. Nothing material has been concealed herewith and no part of it is untrue. So help me God. Verified at Dehradun on ………………Deponent
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd.,
of 2016 Versus
Mehra Traders
LIST OF WITNESSES 1. Mrs. Kanika Singh Director Him &Kays Pvt. Ltd. 2. Branch Manager, Uttarakhand Gramin Bank, 422, Unchapul Branch, Kaladungi Road, Kathgaria, Nainital. 3. Branch Manager, Union Bank of India, RAV Public School, Haldwani, District Nainital. 4. Branch Manager, State Bank of India, PBB Vasant Vihar, Dehradun. 5. Post Master, GPO Dehradun. 6. Post Master GPO Nainital. 7. Any other witness is required.
Dated:Dehradun Presented by:Vaibhav Jain, Advocate.
Counsel for Complainant
In the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Dehradun Complaint No. Him &Kays Agro Pvt. Ltd
Versus
of 2016 Mehra Traders &anr. U/s 138 NI Act PS. Vasant Vihar, Dehradun
Sir, For the reasons stated in the affidavit filed alongwith this application it is most respectfully prayed that
Related Documents
Sec 138 Him & Kays.docx
November 2019 27
#138
May 2020 23
138
November 2019 37
138
November 2019 40
138
December 2019 34
Praise Him Raise Him
October 2019 49More Documents from ""
Bol Fd.docx
August 2019 28
Sec 138 Him & Kays.docx
November 2019 27
Ent Law.docx
November 2019 26
Corp 2
October 2019 19
Insurance Project (autosaved).docx
November 2019 14