https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111589 A company may institute a cheque-dishonour complaint through an authorised representative, and a procedural objection to the original authorisation can be cured by substitution of the representative, particularly where the record shows later approval of the person acting for the company. On the merits, a bare denial of issuance or signature does not by itself rebut the statutory presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act once the cheque and account connection are shown. The accused must adduce supporting material to displace the presumption of a cheque issued towards a legally enforceable debt; absent such evidence, liability under cheque dishonour law remains established. en-us Mon, 05 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:14:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111589 A company may institute a cheque-dishonour complaint through an authorised representative, and a procedural objection to the original authorisation can be cured by substitution of the representative, particularly where the record shows later approval of the person acting for the company. On the merits, a bare denial of issuance or signature does not by itself rebut the statutory presumption under the Negotiable Instruments Act once the cheque and account connection are shown. The accused must adduce supporting material to displace the presumption of a cheque issued towards a legally enforceable debt; absent such evidence, liability under cheque dishonour law remains established. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 05 Jun 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=111589