https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108627 The court quashed the complaints against accused No. 14 under section 138 read with section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, citing lack of specific averments establishing his liability. Additionally, the court emphasized the importance of fulfilling statutory requirements and specific allegations to maintain complaints under section 141 of the Act, ultimately leading to the dismissal of charges against accused No. 14. This judgment sets a precedent regarding liability interpretation under the Negotiable Instruments Act and the necessity of specific allegations to uphold charges against individuals in a company. en-us Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Apr 2012 10:45:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108627 The court quashed the complaints against accused No. 14 under section 138 read with section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, citing lack of specific averments establishing his liability. Additionally, the court emphasized the importance of fulfilling statutory requirements and specific allegations to maintain complaints under section 141 of the Act, ultimately leading to the dismissal of charges against accused No. 14. This judgment sets a precedent regarding liability interpretation under the Negotiable Instruments Act and the necessity of specific allegations to uphold charges against individuals in a company. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 09 Dec 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108627