Case Note & Summary
The appellant, M/s. Sri Balaji Agencies Pvt. Ltd., filed a criminal appeal against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Panaji, dated 26-9-2008, which acquitted the respondents (M/s. Samudra Ropes Pvt. Ltd., its Managing Director Nana P. Naik, and the State) under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The complainant company had received four cheques from the accused company, all dated 1-2-2000, for amounts of Rs.5,00,000 each (three cheques) and Rs.2,48,715 (one cheque). These cheques were dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds, and a statutory notice was not complied with. The complaint was filed by Vijay M.S. Usgaonkar, the Managing Director of the complainant company, who was examined under Section 200 CrPC and during trial. The Sessions Judge acquitted the accused on the ground that the board resolution dated 1-2-2000 (Exh.7) authorizing Usgaonkar to 'depose and conduct proceedings' did not expressly authorize him to file the complaint. The High Court, per Justice N.A. Britto, allowed the appeal, holding that the resolution was sufficient to authorize the filing of the complaint, as the authority to conduct proceedings necessarily includes the authority to initiate them. The court set aside the acquittal and remanded the matter to the Sessions Court for fresh disposal on merits, directing the parties to appear on 20-9-2010.
Headnote
A) Negotiable Instruments Act - Authority to File Complaint - Board Resolution Interpretation - Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - The court considered whether a resolution authorizing the Managing Director to 'depose and conduct proceedings' in matters filed by the company under the Negotiable Instruments Act was sufficient to authorize filing of a complaint. The court held that the resolution was sufficient as it impliedly authorized the filing of the complaint, since conducting proceedings necessarily includes the initiation of such proceedings. The Sessions Judge's narrow interpretation was erroneous. (Paras 2-5) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Examination of Complainant - Section 200, CrPC - The court noted that the Managing Director was examined under Section 200 CrPC and during trial, and his evidence was consistent. The acquittal was based solely on the lack of authority, which was reversed. (Paras 3, 5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Managing Director of a complainant company was duly authorized to file a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, based on a board resolution authorizing him to 'depose and conduct proceedings' in matters filed by the company under the said Act.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 26-9-2008 is set aside. The case is remanded to the Sessions Court, Panaji, for fresh disposal on merits. The parties are directed to appear before the Sessions Court on 20-9-2010.
Law Points
- Authority to file complaint
- Board resolution interpretation
- Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act
- 1881
- Managing Director's powers
- Criminal Procedure Code Section 200
