SC: Reserved Category Candidate Who Availed Prelims Relaxation Cannot Claim an Unreserved Seat  ||  SC: Public Sector Enterprises Cannot Act Against Retired Employees Without Clear Rules  ||  Supreme Court: Single FIR is Permissible in Mass Cheating Cases Arising From One Conspiracy  ||  SC: Courts Cannot Take Cognizance of Time-Barred Cheque Bounce Cases Without Condoning Delay  ||  SC: Exoneration in Disciplinary Proceedings Does Not Always Bar Criminal Prosecution  ||  SC: Judge Cannot Be Presumed Biased Merely Because a Litigant’s Relative Is Police or Court Staff  ||  Delhi HC: Delays From Medical Review Cannot Justify Ante-Dated Seniority For BSF Candidates  ||  Allahabad HC: Being ‘Proclaimed Offender’ Does Not Completely Bar Grant of Anticipatory Bail  ||  Delhi HC: Abortion by a Married Woman For Marital Discord is Legal under The MTP Act  ||  NCLT Kochi: Fraud Has No Time Limit and Directors Cannot Use Delay As a Defense    

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