Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1997 (9) TMI 642

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ssued a cheque which was dishonoured for the reason account closed . The said complaint was taken on file by the XIVth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Madras. To quash the said proceedings, the petitioners have filed the above O.P. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the complaint filed against them is barred by limitation, that there is no required averment in the complaint against the third petitioner and that, therefore, the complaint cannot be maintained against the third petitioner for want of allegation as required under section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 3. Learned counsel is not in a position to substantiate his contention regarding limitation, though the said ground ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aring for the respondent has relied on the decision in Saj Flight Services (P.) Ltd. v. P. T. Gopala Raja, referred to above, wherein, N. Arumugham J. has held that all the persons concerned inclusive of the other directors or the partners must be jointly and severally liable, for which every one had to be added as party. With great respect to the learned judge, I cannot agree with the said principle set out in the judgment. The earlier judgments of this court in Senthilkumar. Tea Industries v. N. Rajkumar [1994] 1 LW (Crl.) 278, referred to above, and C. Balasundaram v. Prakash (Crl. M.P. No. 13898 of 1989, dated 27th November, 1990) were not brought to the notice of the learned judge. In the judgment delivered by Pratap Singh J. in Senthi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ayee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing to the drawer of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and (c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or, as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque, within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice. Explanation. - For the purposes of this section, 'debt or other liability' means a legally enforceable debt or other liability. 141. Offences by companies. - (1) If the person committi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sponsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company at the time of the commission of the offence should be deemed guilty of the offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished for such offence. The use of the words such person in section 138 of the Act would clearly indicate that the person who had drawn the cheque is the person to commit the offence. Section 141 of the Act is not relatable to the penal aspect, but only the evidence aspect relating to the offence committed under section 138 of the Act. 9. A reading of section 141(1) of the Act will clearly establish that only the, person, who, at the time of offence, was in charge of and was responsible to the conduct of the business of the company al .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates