IN THE COURT OF LD.

CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE

(DISTRICT- SOUTH) SAKET COURTS COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
COMPLAINT CASE NO. OF 2020

IN THE MATTER OF:

Technology Development Board
Through its Authorized Representative …. COMPLAINANT
Versus
Originet Technologies Ltd. & Ors. …. ACCUSED(S)

P.S. Safdarjung Enclave U/s 138 NI Act

MEMO OF PARTIES

IN THE MATTER OF:

Technology Development Board
(A statutory Board Constituted by the Govt. of India)
Through its Authorized Representative
Having its Office at Wing-A,
Ground Floor, Vishwakarma Bhawan,
Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, Delhhi-110016. …. COMPLAINANT

VERSUS
1. Originet Technologies Ltd.
Through its Chairman/ Managing Director
Having its Registered Office at:
702, Acme Plaza, Andheri Kurla Road,
Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059
Email: [email protected]

Having Administrative Office at:

208, Tirupati Udyog,
I.B. Patel Road, Goregaon East,
Mumbai- 400063
2. Mr. D.S Mehta
Director, Originet Technologies Ltd.
702, Acne Plaza, Andheri Kurla Road
Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059

3. Mr. Gaurav Bhandari

Director, Originet Technologies Ltd.
702, Acne Plaza, Andheri Kurla Road
Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059

4. Mr. Harsh Daulat Mehta

Director, Originet Technologies Ltd.
702, Acne Plaza, Andheri Kurla Road
Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059

5. Mr. Dileep Shriram Paranjape

Director, Originet Technologies Ltd.
702, Acne Plaza, Andheri Kurla Road
Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059

6. Ms. Anita Kiran Dev Ravat

Director, Originet Technologies Ltd.
702, Acne Plaza, Andheri Kurla Road
Andheri East, Mumbai- 400059 …. ACCUSED

COMPLAINANT
 IN THE COURT OF LD. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
(DISTRICT- SOUTH) SAKET COURTS COMPLEX, NEW DELHI
COMPLAINT CASE NO. OF 2020

IN THE MATTER OF:

Technology Development Board
Through its Authorized Representative …. COMPLAINANT
Versus
Originet Technologies Ltd. & Ors. …. ACCUSED(S)

P.S Safdarjung Enclave U/s 138 NI Act

COMPLAINT UNDER SECTIONS 138 OF THE NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS

ACT, 1881 FOR A SUM OF RS. 1,08,62,822/- (Rupees One Crore Eight Lakh Sixty-
Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Twenty-Two Only)

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHOWETH:

1. That the Complainant is a Statutory Board working under the aegis of Ministry of
Science and Technology, Union of India. The Board was setup to promote technology
development and to further the said objective, it provides commercial assistance
through investment in the equity or grant of loans to industrial concerns and other
agencies, for development and commercial application of indigenous technology and/
or for adopting imported technology to wider domestic applications.

2. That the present complaint has been filed through Ms. Nalini Negi, Assistant Law-
Officer of the Complainant, who is well conversant with the facts of the case and has
been duly authorized by the Letter of Authority dated 04.12.2020 to sign, verify and
institute the present complaint, adduce evidence, etc. and to do such other acts as are
necessary for the disposal of the present complaint.

3. That the Accused No. 1 had approached Complainant in the year 2012 for financial
assistance in developing the project namely “Development, Commercialization and
Indigenization of Nuclear Radiation Monitoring Systems”. The proposal was accepted
and a loan assistance of Rs. 950 Lakhs (Rupees Nine Hundred and Fifty Lakhs Only)
was sanctioned vide loan agreement dated 18.07.2012 and the requisite undertakings
are annexed herewith as ANNEXURE NO.
4. That the Accused No. 2 and 3 on behalf of the Accused No. 1 gave requisite
undertakings and executed various documents duly mentioned in the loan agreement
dated 18.07.2012, pursuant to which loan assistance was disbursed. Thereafter, the
Accused No. 1 have in total exhausted loan assistance amounting to Rs. 910 Lakhs.
(Rupees Nine Hundred Ten Lakhs Only). Copy of the Shortfall Guarantees is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE NO.

5. That the Accused No. 2 and 3 on behalf of Accused No. 1, undertook to return the
loan assistance from 01.01.2014 as per the schedule so annexed with the loan
agreement but the Accused No. 1 sought three extensions which were duly granted by
the Complainant vide supplementary agreements dated 18.10.2013, 28.03.2016 and
19.10.2016. Copy of the Supplementary Agreement dated 19.10.2016 is annexed
herewith as ANNEXURE NO.

6. That the Third Supplementary Agreement dated 19.10.2016 was duly executed by the
Accused No. 2 and 4 respectively on behalf of the Accused No. 1, wherein the
Accused(s) had undertaken to make payments in accordance with the Schedule II i.e.,
Repayment of Loan and Payment of Interest duly annexed with the Third
Supplementary Agreement.

7. That accordingly in discharge of the legally payable debt and as per the outstanding
balance towards the loan assistance provided, the Accused(s) issued a cheque in
favour of the Complainant bearing No. 285912 dated 01.07.2021 amounting to Rs.
1,08,62,822/- (Rupees One Crore Eight Lakh Sixty-Two Thousand Eight Hundred
and Twenty-Two Only) drawn on Dena Bank, Santacruz East Branch, Mumbai
400055 (the “Cheque”). The aforesaid Cheque was presented to Complainant’s Bank
(Union Bank of India at Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi). The mentioned
cheque returned unpaid vide return memo dated 07. 07.2021 with the remarks as
“Funds Insufficient”.

8. That the above-described dishonoured cheque by the Accused(s) is deliberate and

wilful. The said cheque was issued for repayment of legally enforceable debt from the
Accused(s) to the Complainant. It is evident that the said offence of dishonour of
cheque has been committed with an intension to cause wrongful loss to the
Complainant. The Accused(s) herein have committed the offence under Section 138
of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

9. That the Accused(s) No. 2 and 6 are the Directors and Officers of the Accused No. 1
and are therefore liable for conducting the day-to-day affairs of the Accused No. 1
and hence liable for the dishonour of the aforesaid cheque.

10. That after receiving the information, the Complainant Company served the
Accused(s) person with the Statutory Legal Demand Notice under Section 138 of the
Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 dated 26.10.2020 to pay a sum of Rs. 1,08,62,822/-
within a period of 15 days of the receipt of the notice through courier, on their official
 address of correspondence duly mentioned in the official records of the Complainant.
The Legal Notice was duly served on all the Accused(s) on their registered address on
28.10.2020. However, the notice served on the administrative address of the Accused
No. 1 Company was received back undelivered on 03.11.2020 stating shifting of
address at the office of the Complainant.

11. That the Accused(s) replied to the said notice vide Reply dated 05.11.2020. However,
the Accused(s) have neither complied with the notice nor paid the sum due. Thus, the
Accused(s) have committed an offence under Section 138 and 142 of the Negotiable
Instruments Act, 1881. Copy of the legal notice dated 26.10.2020 and the courier
receipts dated 26.10.2020 are annexed herewith. The proof of delivery of legal notice
is annexed herewith. The reply dated 05.11.2020 received from Accused(s) is annexed
herewith.

12. That the present cheque was issued against the legally enforceable debt by the
Accused(s) to the Complainant Company for the loan taken by them. The cheque was
presented through Banker of the Complainant from its Safdarjung Development Area,
New Delhi Branch to the Banker of the Accused(s). The Complainant received
information regarding dishonouring of cheque from its Banker at Safdarjung
Development Area, New Delhi. The Accused(s) are indebted to Complainant
Company at New Delhi.

13. That this Hon’ble Court has jurisdiction to entertain the present complaint as the
cheque was presented in the Bank Account duly maintained with the Union Bank of
India, Branch at Safdarjung Development Area, New Delhi which is within the
territorial limits of this Hon’ble Court.

14. That the Complainant is filing the documents which it has in its possession and power
and reserves its right and seeks leave of this Hon’ble Court to file and get summoned
such other documents as may be necessary for the purpose of the present complaint.

15. That the cause of action arose when the Accused(s) did not pay the cheque amount
even after 15 days from the date when legal notice of demand was served upon the
Accused(s). Hence, the complaint is filed within the period of limitation prescribed
under the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 and the Accused persons are liable to be
summoned, prosecuted and punished in accordance with the law.

16. That no other similar complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act,
1881 has been filed or is pending before this Hon’ble Court or any other Court for the
cheque in question.

PRAYER

In view of the afore-mentioned facts and circumstances and in the interest of justice it
is most respectfully prayed that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to:
A) Take cognizance of the offence, summon the Accused(s) and put the Accused(s)
to trial for the offence committed by them under Sections 138 & 142 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881;
B) To impose a fine of double the amount of the cheque and direct the same to be
paid to the Complainant;
C) To direct the Accused persons to pay compensation under Section 357 Cr.P.C. to
the Complainant against dishonour of the cheque in question;
D) To award costs of the present proceedings in favour of the Complainant and
against the Accused as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of this case.
COMPLAINANT
Through