https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299416 A non-signatory partner cannot be made vicariously liable in a Section 138 NI Act complaint unless the pleading specifically states that the partner was in charge of and responsible for the firm's business at the relevant time; the firm's complaint through its partners remained competent, and the signatory partner could still be proceeded against. The presumption under Section 139 is rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities, and it was displaced where the cheques were issued against unsettled accounts, provisional bills, and an unsubstantiated interest claim. Once rebutted, the complainant had to prove an ascertained, legally enforceable debt, which it failed to do. en-us Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Dec 2021 10:43:14 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299416 A non-signatory partner cannot be made vicariously liable in a Section 138 NI Act complaint unless the pleading specifically states that the partner was in charge of and responsible for the firm's business at the relevant time; the firm's complaint through its partners remained competent, and the signatory partner could still be proceeded against. The presumption under Section 139 is rebuttable on a preponderance of probabilities, and it was displaced where the cheques were issued against unsettled accounts, provisional bills, and an unsubstantiated interest claim. Once rebutted, the complainant had to prove an ascertained, legally enforceable debt, which it failed to do. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 14 Dec 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299416