CCPA Fines Chaayos Rs.50,000 for Default Inclusion of Service Charge in Bills  ||  MP HC: Major Unmarried Daughter Need Not Prove Disability to Claim Maintenance if Unable to Earn  ||  Madras HC: Travel Costs Must be Reimbursed to Independent Special Public Prosecutors  ||  MP HC: Timely Coordination Between Police, Banks and Telecom Bodies is Crucial in Cyber Fraud  ||  Kerala HC: Foreign Counsel Cannot Conduct Cross-Examination Before Commissioners  ||  Allahabad HC: Proclaimed Offenders Get Anticipatory Bail Only in Rare and Exceptional Cases  ||  Madras HC: Repeated Intimacy Alone Doesn't Prove Consent; Coercion & Deception Must be Examined  ||  SC: Government Can Revise Royalty under the MMDR Act Despite a Silent Lease Deed  ||  SC: Recovery of a Weapon Alone is Insufficient to Prove Guilt Without Conscious Possession  ||  SC: Section 68 of Evidence Act Does Not Require Attesting Witnesses to Prove Registered Sale Deeds    

COMPANY - Cheque Bounce Case Against Director: Must be Proved that Director responsible for Company's Conduct - (11 Mar 2019)

COMPANY

Supreme Court has reiterated that, a 'cheque bounce' complaint against a Company and its Director, must contain a specific averment that Director was in charge of, and responsible for, conduct of company's business at the time when offence U/S- 138/141 of Negotiable Instruments Act was committed.

Tags : SUPREME COURT   CHEQUE BOUNCE CASE AGAINST DIRECTOR  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved