Cumulative liability 138 N I Act
Amounts mentioned herein are for example and for the sake of understanding:
In the Complaint, the Complainant stated that he had paid Rs.1000 to A1 (Company), Rs.200 to A2 (Managing Partner) and Rs.200 to A3 (Partner) and his friend had paid Rs.300 to A1. Total Rs.1700.00.
Amount paid to the A1 (Company) by Complainant and his friend was towards acquiring share in the firm and Amount paid to A2 and A3 was towards Goodwill consideration. The Complainant didn’t fulfil the entire consideration/goodwill, differences cropped and the Complainant and his friend wanted to withdraw from the partnership firm.
An MOU was entered between A1 rep by A2 as 1st party and Complainant and his friend jointly rep as 2nd Party. A1 had agreed to repay Rs.1500.00 as settlement within 3 months and issued a blank cheque of the bank A/c of A1, in case of failure to repay within 3 mts, the 2nd Party can use the cheque for the pending amount. A3 is not at all involved in executing the MOU or deliberations and issuing of blank cheque.
As per the MOU, both the Complainant and his friend are the joint beneficiaries of the amount realized through the MOU. A1 company could only pay the part amount Rs.400 to the Complainant. A2 had requested the Complainant for two months for the balance amt of Rs.1100.00. Complainant did not accept and filled the blank cheque in his favour for Rs.1100.00 and presented the same which was returned as Payment Stopped by the Drawer. The Complainant had issued a legal notice to A1 with A2 & A3 as co-accused, stating that he had paid a total amount of Rs.1700.00 and as per the understanding, a cheque for Rs.1100.00 has been issued by the accused towards repayment which was returned.
A1 replied to the stating that the Complainant had paid Rs.1000.00 only and his claim that he paid an amount of Rs.1700.00 to A1 is false. A1 didn’t issue the Cheque for Rs.1100.00 and Complainant had misused the blank cheque by filling the date, beneficiary and amount. A3 had also issued a reply notice that he is in no way connected with the matter as he is not a signatory of the MOU, Cheque or the deliberations.
Individually the Complainant had paid an amount Rs.1000.00 to A1 company and he admitted that he had already received Rs.400.00 from the A1. Hence the net due amount would be Rs.600.00 only whereas, he had filled the blank cheque for Rs.1100.00 in his favor.
Now the Questions are:
1. Whether the Complainant is eligible to claim the total cumulative dues from A1, A2 and A3 as legally enforceable debt through the single Cheque belonging A1 company?
2. Whether individual transactions between the Complainant and A2 & A3 can be clubbed with the liability of A1 company as by making them as Co-Accused?
3. Whether amount paid towards Goodwill is legally recoverable?
4. Whether the Complainant is eligible to claim the amount receivable by his friend as well, without making him as a party to the Cheque, Legal Notice and the Complaint?
Asked 4 years ago in Criminal Law
Religion: Hindu
A3 had retired as Partner while the Complainant and his friend entered as Partners, the retirement deed was also signed by the Complainant and his friend, after retirement, A3 never involved in any business activities.
A3 retirement has been reiterated in the MOU executed between the A1 company rep by A2 as 1st Party and the Complainant and his friend Jointly represented as 2nd Party.
A3 has filed a quash petition in the High Court and all the proceedings against A3 is stayed by the High Court and petition is pending.
Parties to the MOU:
1st Party - A1 company represented by A2
2nd Party - Complainant and his friend jointly.
Whereas:
1. The cheque in question is filled in favor of the Complainant only
2. The Legal Notice to A1, A2 and A3 is issued by the Complainant only
3. Complaint u/s 138 N I Act is filed by the Complainant only
Now the Question is:
Whether the MOU can be treated as a supporting document to the Complaint u/s 138 N I Act, since the Parties of the MOU and the Complaint are not exactly same.
In MOU – A3 who had already retired, is not a Party/Signatory to MOU
In Complaint – The Complainant’s friend who jointly represent as 2nd Party of the MOU is not a Beneficiary of the Cheque or Party to the Legal Notice and Complaint.
Asked 4 years ago