https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167651 The appeal was dismissed as the Court found no offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act due to the absence of an enforceable liability at the time of issuing the bounced cheque. The complaint, filed by a Director without proper authorization, was deemed not maintainable, emphasizing that only the company, as the holder in due course, could file such complaints. The Court upheld the lower court's decision to acquit the accused, concluding that the appellant's attempt to recover the amount was a civil dispute lacking an existing liability. en-us Thu, 26 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Dec 2014 12:20:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167651 The appeal was dismissed as the Court found no offense under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act due to the absence of an enforceable liability at the time of issuing the bounced cheque. The complaint, filed by a Director without proper authorization, was deemed not maintainable, emphasizing that only the company, as the holder in due course, could file such complaints. The Court upheld the lower court's decision to acquit the accused, concluding that the appellant's attempt to recover the amount was a civil dispute lacking an existing liability. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 26 Dec 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=167651