https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411803 A complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act against a sole proprietor was maintainable even if the proprietorship concern was not impleaded separately, because a proprietorship is not a distinct juristic person and Section 141 does not apply to it. On the merits, the cheque, signature and dishonour were undisputed, and the complainant's financial capacity was supported by salary proof and bank entries. The defence that the cheque was stolen and misused was not proved by credible evidence, so the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 remained unrebutted. The appellate acquittal was therefore held unsustainable, and the trial court's conviction and sentence were restored. en-us Fri, 13 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Sep 2021 09:06:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411803 A complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act against a sole proprietor was maintainable even if the proprietorship concern was not impleaded separately, because a proprietorship is not a distinct juristic person and Section 141 does not apply to it. On the merits, the cheque, signature and dishonour were undisputed, and the complainant's financial capacity was supported by salary proof and bank entries. The defence that the cheque was stolen and misused was not proved by credible evidence, so the statutory presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 remained unrebutted. The appellate acquittal was therefore held unsustainable, and the trial court's conviction and sentence were restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 13 Aug 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=411803