https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108934 The court dismissed the petition to quash the complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It held that a director cannot evade liability by resigning after receiving notice of dishonor, company absence as an accused does not invalidate the complaint, and the presumption exists that a cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt. The court directed the Magistrate to expedite the case without influence from the order's observations, clarifying the legal aspects of director liability, company inclusion, and cheque purpose presumption. en-us Fri, 08 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 04 Apr 2012 18:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108934 The court dismissed the petition to quash the complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It held that a director cannot evade liability by resigning after receiving notice of dishonor, company absence as an accused does not invalidate the complaint, and the presumption exists that a cheque was issued for a legally enforceable debt. The court directed the Magistrate to expedite the case without influence from the order's observations, clarifying the legal aspects of director liability, company inclusion, and cheque purpose presumption. Case-Laws Companies Law Fri, 08 Mar 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=108934