Back
TIRTHANKAR GHOSH
Avneet Bedi – Appellant
Versus
State Of West Bengal – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Tirthankar Ghosh, J. - The present revisional application has been preferred challenging the proceedings being complaint case no. C/36041/2010 under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act pending before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 8th Court, Calcutta including the orders passed therein.
2. The allegations made in the petition of complaint filed at the instance of Tata Steel Processing and Distribution Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 'Complainant company') against IDEB Projects (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'accused company') and its responsible persons were to the effect, that in discharge of legally enforceable debts and liability arising out of supply of cut and bend reinforcement bar by the complainant company, the accused company issued two cheques of Rs.50,00,000/- each aggregating to a sum of Rs.1,00,00,000/- . The said cheques bearing nos. 014046 and 014047 both dated 31.03.2010 were drawn on HDFC Bank, Connaught Place Branch, New Delhi. The said two cheques were signed by the accused no.2 (Harkirat Singh Bedi) as a Director and authorised person of the accused company and handed over to the complainant company at its office. The said t
The duty of the complainant to make specific averments to establish vicarious liability and the need for a liberal construction of the complaint to determine the sufficiency of the allegations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of arraigning the company as an accused for maintaining the prosecution under Section 141 of the NI Act, and the requirement of speci....
(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....
Dishonour of cheque – Company/Firm is a necessary party where offence has been committed on behalf of Company/Firm.
The issuance of a cheque establishes liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, requiring the accused to rebut the presumption of its validity, which he failed to 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
