Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SHALINDER KAUR, J
Noida Dhatu Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Udai Continentals & Anr. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appeal filed under section 378 of cr.p.c. against acquittal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of the case involving dishonored cheques. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 9) |
| 3. arguments regarding the liability of respondent no. 2. (Para 15 , 19 , 21) |
| 4. court's observations on liability under the ni act. (Para 27 , 30 , 34) |
| 5. final decision to dismiss the appeal. (Para 39) |
JUDGMENT
HON’BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR
1. The present Criminal Appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) has been filed by the Appellant, assailing the Judgment dated 24.09.2011 (“Impugned Order”), passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Karkardooma Courts, Delhi, in Complaint Case No. 401/2004, titled “M/s Noida Dhatu Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s Udai Continentals & Anr”, whereby the Respondent No.2 has been acquitted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (“NI Act”).
2. Before proceeding to the submissions addressed on behalf of the parties, it would be relevant to set out the factual matrix, which has led to the filing of the present Criminal Appeal.
Factual Background
3. The Appellant, M/s. Noida Dhatu Pvt. Ltd., a company registered under the C
Only the proprietor of a proprietorship firm can be held liable under Section 138 of the NI Act; mere representation does not establish liability.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the liability of a company and its director under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 is contingent on the relationship betwee....
Point of Law : Dishonoured of Cheque - Quash of Complaint - Offences committed by companies - Cheque has not been signed by petitioner and cheque has been issued with regard to business concern that ....
A sole proprietorship cannot be prosecuted under Section 141 of the N.I. Act unless the proprietor is named in the complaint; the complaint was also quashed for being premature.
A proprietor of a proprietary concern can file a complaint as the payee under Section 138 of the N.I Act.
The proprietor of a sole proprietorship holding liability for a dishonored cheque under Section 138 NI Act does not require the business entity to be arrayed as an accused.
The complainant, as a sole proprietor, had the standing to file under Section 138 of the NI Act, as ownership and liabilities of a sole proprietorship are inseparable.
The court clarified that a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable against individuals without needing to name the proprietorship, as the individual is liable fo....
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
