Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: internal auditor in Vijayraj Surana vs M/S.Bhima Jewellery on 6 May, 2015Matching Fragments
17. Admittedly, both the complaints have been filed through a power of attorney, by name G.Veeraputhiran, who was the Internal Auditor of the complainant Firms. Now, the contention of the petitioner is that, the power of attorney did not spell out whether he has any personal knowledge about the transaction between the parties and in the absence of any personal knowledge, he is not competent to file the complaint. It is a settled law that a power of attorney holder can file a complaint, appear and depose for the purpose of issuance of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The only restriction is that the power of attorney should have a personal knowledge about the transaction between the parties, and in the absence of any personal knowledge, he cannot depose. In this regard, it is relevant to rely upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in A.C.Narayanan v. State of Maharashtra and another reported in 2014(1) LW 698, wherein, at Paragraph No.26, it has been held as follows:
18. In the instant case, the complainant was an Internal Auditor of the complainant Firms. That apart, he said to have filed an affidavit along with the complaints stating that he has personal knowledge about the transaction between the complainant and the accused. After considering all those materials, the learned Magistrate has now taken cognizance of the offence and also issued summons. Whether the power of attorney has any personal knowledge regarding the transaction between the parties, can be ascertained only during the trial. At the stage of taking cognizance and issuing process, the learned Magistrate can go only by the contents of the complaint and also the sworn-in statement or the affidavit filed by the power of attorney along with the complaint. Now, based on those materials, cognizance has been taken and summons issued. Whether the power of attorney has personal knowledge about the transaction, and he is competent to depose, is a matter to be considered at the time of trial. On that ground, the complaints cannot be quashed at this stage. http://www.judis.nic.in Crl.O.P.(MD).Nos.22815 and 22816 of 2018