Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT DHARWAD BENCH
K.V.ARAVIND
M.N.Vasu – Appellant
Versus
Veena Vinod Balase – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction based on cheques issued. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. dispute over individual capacity and firm liability. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 3. section 138 requires individual liability. (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. partnership firm and partners' joint liability. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 5. jurisdictional errors addressable in revision. (Para 15 , 16 , 18) |
| 6. complaints under section 200 not maintainable. (Para 19) |
ORDER :
1. Heard Sri. Shriprasad J. Joshi, learned counsel for Sri. R.C. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused and Sri. Sachidanand B. Patil, learned counsel along with Sri. Bunty Rajkumar Kapahi, learned counsel for the respondent-complainant.
2. The accused in C.C.No.1688/2007 and C.C.No.1214/2010 on the file of III Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., at Belagavi, (for short, 'the trial Court') is before this Court challenging the order of conviction dated 29.05.2018 and common order dated 01.06.2019 in Criminal Appeal Nos.226/2018 and 227/2018 on the file of IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Belagavi (for short, 'the appellate Court').
3. The accused approached the complainant for a loan of Rs.2,50,000/- in August 2004 with a promise to repay the same and the same wa
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.
There is a presumption under Section 139 of the N.I.Act that there exists a legally enforceable debt or liability.
Criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the N.I. Act require the partnership firm to be arraigned as an accused; failure to do so renders the proceedings against individual partners not maintainabl....
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....
Partners of a firm can be individually prosecuted for cheque dishonour despite the firm's acquittal, as the firm lacks separate legal identity.
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 can be held vicariously liable for dishonoured cheques issued by the firm, but liability must be established based on specific involvement in the transaction.
Revisional jurisdiction limited to perversity; unregistered firm competent for s138 NI Act complaint; ss118/139 presumptions arise on cheque admission, rebuttable by evidence; subsequent payments do ....
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
