IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates,

Office at:
H-31, S.D. Mandir Road,
Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi-110059.
Through
Nitin Kumar,
Special Power of Attorney Holder. …Complainant

Versus

1. M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited,

567/3, 75th C Cross,
6th Block, Rajaji Nagar,
Bangalore, Karnataka-560010.

Also at:
M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited,
No.2, 1st Floor, 5th Main C.H.B.C.S,
1st Layout (Above State Bank of India),
Vijay Nagar, Bangalore-560040.

2. Chaya Prabhakar,
Director,
M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited,
567/3, 75th C Cross,
6th Block, Rajaji Nagar,
Bangalore, Karnataka-560010.

3. Shivanand Naik,
Director,
M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited,
NO. 518, Engineering College,
Layout, 3rd Stage, 1st Block,
Basaveshwara Nagar,
Banglore-560079.

4. Prabhakar Rao,
Director,
M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited,
567/3, 75th C Cross,
6th Block, Rajaji Nagar,
Bangalore, Karnataka-560010. …Accused Persons

U/S: 138 N.I. Act.

P.S.: Janak Puri.
COMPLAINT U/S-138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT AS AMENDED
UPTODATE ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH: -

1. That the complainant is engaged into the business of distribution and

supplying Fire Protection, Detection, Gas, Home & Industrial Security & Safety
Products to Installers, System Integrators and various Private & Government
Institutions all over India. The complainant is a leading supplier and has a vast
experience with leading fire companies and enjoys an exceptionally good
reputation in the market. That the present complaint has been signed, verified
and filed by Mr. Nitin Kumar, Special Power of Attorney Holder of the
complainant. He is well conversant with the facts of the present case and has the
personal knowledge of the transactions with the accused persons.

2. That the accused no. 2, 3 and 4 are Directors of the accused no.1 and are
in charge of and responsible to its business and day to day affairs of the accused
no.1. That the accused persons approached the complainant for business and
supplying them the Hose Reel drums. The accused persons spoke very high about
their business dealings and their credibility in the market and assured the
complainant fair business dealings, timely and prompt payment for the goods
supplied on credit.

3. That the accused persons placed a purchase order for the requisite goods
and the complainant supplied the said goods to the accused persons time to time
as per their requisition/requirement at their desired address/destination. The
complainant believing their false assurances and misrepresentations as true and
being taken in confidence, the complainant sold the goods worth Rs.2,93,760/-
(Rupees Two Lac Ninety Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty Only) to the
accused persons vide two separate invoices.

4. That the complainant supplied the goods as desired by accused persons

and the accused persons for and on behalf of accused no.1 acknowledged and
confirmed their liability and towards the discharge of the same, the accused
persons issued two cheques bearing no. 000338 dated 12.10.2015 and cheque
bearing no.000347 dated 15.10.2015 both drawn on Bank of Baroda, No. 372/90,
J.J. Residency, G-1, 18th Cr., Vijayanagar, Bangalore-560040, for the amount of
Rs.1,46,880/- (Rupees One Lac Forty Six Thousand Eight Hundred and Eight Only)
each in favour of the complainant. The said cheques were issued by the accused
persons with an assurance that the same are good for payment and would be
honoured upon their presentation.

5. That the complainant presented the said two cheques through it’s bank
upon the bank of the accused persons but both the said cheques were returned
dishonoured with remarks “Funds Insufficient”. The remarks of the bank for the
dishonour of the said cheques was brought to the knowledge of the accused
persons as and when the same got dishonoured but the accused persons on one
or the other pretext till date have not paid the said amount to the complainant.

6. That the accused persons have been tactfully gaining time on one pretext
or the other to avoid the discharge of legal liability towards the complainant. The
accused persons have failed to pay the legal amount due towards the
complainant till date. Thus, the amount of the said cheques remains unpaid. The
accused persons have blatantly failed to honour the said cheques despite their
assurances and the accused persons have belied to the complainant in order to
serve their ulterior motives.

7. That the complainant thereafter got sent a legal notice through his counsel
dated 27.01.2016 to the accused persons through Speed Post and Registered Post
demanding the amount of the said cheques due from the accused persons. The
said legal demand notice has been duly served upon the accused persons. The
accused persons have admitted their liability through letter dated 11.02.2016 but
have not paid any amount towards the discharge of their legal liability to the
complainant. The amount of the said cheques remains unpaid. The accused
persons have committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act. Hence the present complaint.

8. That in the aforesaid manner, the accused persons have cheated and
dishonestly induced the complainant to sell the goods to the accused persons on
credit and to accept the said cheques concealing the fact that the accused
persons have no intention to discharge their legal liability towards the
complainant. By the aforesaid act and conduct, the accused persons have caused
wrongful loss to the complainant and wrongful gain to themselves. The accused
persons have misrepresented that the said cheques would be honoured on their
presentation, but their representation was false even to their own knowledge.
From the very outset, the accused persons had no intention to pay the legally
recoverable amount to the complainant. From the very beginning, the intention
of the accused persons was malafide and dishonest. The accused persons
intentionally and deliberately did not honour the said cheques for the solitary and
malafide purposes of cheating the complainant.

9. That the accused persons were bound to make the payment of the said
cheques with in a period of fifteen days of the receipt of the said demand notice.
By not doing so, the accused persons have committed an offence punishable
under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as amended up to date.

10. That the complainant has been working for gain in Delhi. The said cheques
have been presented and received as dishonored in Delhi. The said Demand
notice was issued from Delhi. The amount of said cheques is payable in Delhi.
Thus, the Hon'ble Court has the jurisdiction to try and entertain the present
complaint as the offence has been committed within the jurisdiction of the
Hon’ble Court.

11. That the complaint is within the period of limitation as prescribed by the
Chapter XVII of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

12. That the complainant has not filed any other complaint in respect of the
said dishonoured cheques in any court.

It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be
pleased to summon the accused persons under Section 138 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act of 1881 as amended up to date. The accused persons may be
tried and punished to the maximum in accordance with law for the aforesaid
offences committed by them.
 It is further prayed that the amount of the fine imposed upon and
ultimately so recovered from the accused persons, as per law, may be paid to the
complainant as compensation, in the interest of justice.

To pass such other order(s) which this Hon’ble Court deems fit and proper
in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the complainant and
against the accused persons.

Delhi Complainant
Dated: 01.03.2016 Through

For Navneet Sharma & Co.

Navneet Sharma, Advocate.
Kapil Kumar, Advocate.
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates …Complainant

Versus

M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited & Ors. …Accused Persons

LIST OF WITNESSES ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT

1. Complainant.

2. Manager/Concerned Officer of the bank of the accused.

3. Manager/Concerned officer of the bank of the Complainant.

4. Any other witness with the kind permission of the Hon'ble Court.

Delhi Complainant
Dated: 01.03.2016 Through

For Navneet Sharma & Co.

Navneet Sharma, Advocate.
Kapil Kumar, Advocate.
IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates …Complainant

Versus

M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited & Ors. …Accused Persons

LIST OF DATES

1. Cheques 12.10.2015 and 15.10.2015

2. Bank Memo 06.01.2016

3. Legal Notice 27.01.2016

4. Service of Notice within 4-5 days

5. Complaint 01.03.2016

Delhi Complainant
Dated:01.03.2016 Through

For Navneet Sharma & Co.

Navneet Sharma, Advocate.
Kapil Kumar, Advocate.
 IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates …Complainant

Versus

M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited & Ors. …Accused Persons

S.NO LIST OF DOCUMENTS PAGE NO.

1. Special Power of Attorney.

2. True copy of Purchase Order.

3. True copy of Invoices.

4. Original Cheques.

5. Original Bank memos.

6. True Copy of Legal Notice Dated 27.01.2016.

7. Original Postal Receipts.

8. Internet Delivery Report of Legal Demand Notice.

9. Original Reply of Accused persons.

10. Master Data Registrar of Companies.

Delhi Complainant
Dated: 01.03.2016 Through

For Navneet Sharma & Co.

Navneet Sharma, Advocate.
Kapil Kumar, Advocate.
 IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates …Complainant

Versus

M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited & Ors. …Accused Persons

INDEX

S. NO. PARTICULARS PAGES C. FEE

1. Complaint. Rs. 2/-

2. List of Dates.

3. List of Witnesses.

4. List of Documents along with

Documents.
5. Affidavit.
6. Pre Summoning Evidence.
7. Vakalatnama. Rs.2/-

Delhi Complainant
Dated:01.03.2016 Through

For Navneet Sharma & Co.

Navneet Sharma, Advocate.
Kapil Kumar, Advocate.
 IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates …Complainant

Versus

M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited & Ors. …Accused Persons

PRE-SUMMONING EVIDENCE BY WAY OF AFFIDAVIT ON BEHALF OF THE

COMPLAINANT

I, Nitin Kumar, S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand, Special Power of Attorney holder for M/s
Devi Karam Associates, having office at H-31, S.D. Mandir Road, Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi-110059,do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under: -

1. I state that the complainant firm is engaged into the business of

distribution and supplying Fire Protection, Detection, Gas, Home & Industrial
Security & Safety Products to Installers, System Integrators and various Private &
Government Institutions all over India. The complainant is a leading supplier and
has vast experience with leading fire companies and enjoys an exceptionally good
reputation in the market. That the present complaint has been signed, verified
and filed by me being a Special Power of Attorney Holder of the complainant. I
am well conversant with the facts of the present case and have personal
knowledge of the transactions with the accused persons.

2. I state that the accused no. 2, 3 and 4 are Directors of the accused no.1
and are in charge of and responsible to its business and day to day affairs of the
accused no.1. The accused persons approached the complainant for business and
supplied them the Hose Reel Drums. The accused persons spoke very highly
about their business dealings and their credibility in the market and assured the
complainant fair business dealings, timely and prompt payment for the goods
supplied on credit.

3. I state that the accused persons placed a purchase order for the requisite
goods and the complainant supplied the said goods to the accused persons time
to time as per their requisition/requirement at their desired address/destination.
The complainant believing their false assurances and misrepresentations as true
and being taken in confidence, the complainant sold the goods worth
Rs.2,93,760/- (Rupees Two Lac Ninety Three Thousand Seven Hundred and Sixty
Only) to the accused persons via two separate invoices.

4. I state that the complainant supplied the goods as desired by accused

persons and the accused persons for and on behalf of accused no.1
acknowledged and confirmed their liability and towards the discharge of the
same, the accused persons issued two cheques bearing no. 000338 dated
12.10.2015 and cheque bearing no.000347 dated 15.10.2015 both drawn on
Bank of Baroda, No. 372/90, J.J. Residency, G-1, 18 th Cr., Vijayanagar, Bangalore-
560040, for the amount of Rs.1,46,880/- (Rupees One Lac Forty Six Thousand
Eight Hundred and Eight Only) each in favour of the complainant. The said
cheques were issued by the accused persons with an assurance that the same are
good for payment and would be honoured upon their presentation.

5. I state that the complainant presented the said two cheques through it’s
bank upon the bank of the accused persons but both the said cheques were
returned dishonoured with remarks “Funds Insufficient”. The remarks of the
bank for the dishonour of the said cheques was brought to the knowledge of the
accused persons as and when the same got dishonoured but the accused persons
on one or the other pretext till date have not paid the said amount to the
complainant.

6. I state that the accused persons have been tactfully gaining time on one
pretext or the other to avoid the discharge of legal liability towards the
complainant. The accused persons have failed to pay the legal amount due
towards the complainant till date. Thus, the amount of the said cheques remains
unpaid. The accused persons have blatantly failed to honour the said cheques
despite their assurances and the accused persons have belied to the complainant
in order to serve their ulterior motives.

7. I state that the complainant thereafter got sent a legal notice through his
counsel dated 27.01.2016 to the accused persons through Speed Post and
Registered Post demanding the amount of the said cheques due from the accused
persons. The said legal demand notice has been duly served upon the accused
persons. The accused persons have admitted their liability through letter dated
11.02.2016 but have not paid any amount towards the discharge of their legal
liability to the complainant. The amount of the said cheques remains unpaid. The
accused persons have committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act.

8. I state that in the aforesaid manner, the accused persons have cheated
and dishonestly induced the complainant to sell the goods to the accused persons
on credit and to accept the said cheques concealing the fact that the accused
persons have no intention to discharge their legal liability towards the
complainant. By the aforesaid act and conduct, the accused persons have caused
wrongful loss to the complainant and wrongful gain to themselves. The accused
persons have misrepresented that the said cheques would be honoured on their
presentation, but their representation was false even to their own knowledge.
From the very outset, the accused persons had no intention to pay the legally
recoverable amount to the complainant. From the very beginning, the intention
of the accused persons was malafide and dishonest. The accused persons
intentionally and deliberately did not honour the said cheques for the solitary and
malafide purposes of cheating the complainant.

9. I state that the accused persons were bound to make the payment of the
said cheques with in a period of fifteen days of the receipt of the said demand
notice. By not doing so, the accused persons have committed an offence
punishable under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, as amended up
to date.
10. I state that the complainant has been working for gain in Delhi. The said
cheques have been presented and received as dishonored in Delhi. The said
Demand notice was issued from Delhi. The amount of said cheques is payable in
Delhi. Thus, the Hon'ble Court has the jurisdiction to try and entertain the
present complaint as the offence has been committed within the jurisdiction of
the Hon’ble Court.

11. I state that the complainant has not filed any other complaint in respect
of the said dishonoured cheques in any court.
12. I state that the Original Special Power of Attorney Dated 29.02.2016 is on
the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/1. The True copy of Purchase Order
is on the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/2. The True copy of Invoices
are on the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/3 (Colly). The Original cheque
bearing no. 000338 is on the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/4. The
Original Bank Memo dated 06.01.2016 of the cheque bearing no. 000338 is on
the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/5. The Original cheque bearing no.
000347 is on the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/6. The Original Bank
Memo dated 06.01.2016 of the cheque bearing no. 000347 is on the record and
may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/7. The true copy of the legal notice dated
27.01.2016 is on the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/8. The Original
Postal Receipts are on the record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/9. The
Delivery Report of Indian Post through internet is on the record and may be
exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/10 (Colly). The Original Reply of the accused persons to the
legal demand notice is on record and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/11. The
internet printout of the Master Data of Registrar of Companies is on the record
and may be exhibited as Ex.Cw-1/12.

13. I state that the complaint is true and correct and bears my signatures.

It is, prayed that the accused persons may be summoned, tried and
punished to the maximum as prescribed in law for the offence committed by
them, punishable under Sections 138/142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and
the amount of the fine imposed upon and ultimately so recovered from, the
accused persons, as per law, may be paid to the complainant as compensation,
in the interest of justice.

DEPONENT

VERIFICATION: Verified at Delhi on 01.03.2016 that the contents of my above

affidavit are true and correct. No part of it is false and nothing material has been
concealed there from.

DEPONENT
 IN THE COURT OF ADDITIONAL CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, DELHI.

C.C.NO._______2016
In re:

M/s Devi Karam Associates …Complainant

Versus

M/s Excel FPS & S Engineers India Private Limited & Ors. …Accused Persons

AFFIDAVIT
I, Nitin Kumar, S/o Sh. Ramesh Chand, Special Power of Attorney holder for M/s
Devi Karam Associates, having office at H-31, S.D. Mandir Road, Uttam Nagar,
New Delhi-110059,do hereby solemnly affirm and state on oath as under: -

1. That I am the complainant in the aforesaid matter and the complaint U/s
138 NI Act has been filed by me against the accused persons.

2. That I have not filed any other complaint or any case against the accused
persons in any court of law under Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. That this is only case which I have filed against the accused persons before
this Hon’ble Court.

Deponent
Verification:-
Verified at Delhi on this 01.03.2016 that the contents of the above said affidavit
are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and nothing has been
concealed therefrom.

Deponent