Back
SURAJ GOVINDARAJ
G. K. Akshata, W/o Dr. K. J. Rudradev – Appellant
Versus
V. Raghavendra – Respondent
ORDER :
| Table of Contents |
| A. Background |
| B. Submissions of Petitioners |
| C. Submissions of Respondent |
| D. Points For Consideration |
| E. Whether the Sessions Court could exercise review powers under Section 397 of Cr.P.C. in respect of order passed under Section 251 of Cr.P.C? |
| G. Whether without issuance of notice to a partnership firm, whether registered or unregistered, criminal proceedings under Section 138 could be filed or would it be barred under Section 141 of the N.I. Act? |
| H. Whether issuance of a notice to one of the partners would amount to service of a valid notice on the firm? |
| I. Whether separate notices or a single notice with separate demarcation of the firm and the partners is required under Section 138 of the N.I. Act leading to a presumption under Section 141 of N.I. Act? |
| J. In the event of the partnership firm or the partner not being arraigned as an accused in a comp |
A complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act is not maintainable if the partnership firm is not made a party, as individual partners cannot be liable without arraigning the firm as a principal ac....
Prosecution against a partner of a partnership firm under Section 138 of the N.I. Act is not maintainable without including the firm as an accused, affirming the principle of vicarious liability.
Partners of a firm are jointly and severally liable for cheque dishonor under the Negotiable Instruments Act, irrespective of whether a partner has formally resigned, as long as they were part of the....
There is a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act that there exists a legally enforceable debt or liability.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for specific averments to establish vicarious liability of partners in a partnership firm under Section 138 of the NI Act and the n....
(1) Dishonour of cheque – Offence by company – For fastening criminal liability, there is no legal requirement for complainant to show that accused partner of firm was aware about each and every tran....
A partnership firm cannot be individually liable under Section 138 of the N.I. Act without including all partners in the complaint; liability is joint and several.
Clear and specific averments are necessary in criminal complaints under N.I. Act to hold individuals vicariously liable; mere association with a firm or vague allegations are insufficient.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
