<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2006 (7) TMI 736 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303032</link>
    <description>Vicarious criminal liability of partners under the Negotiable Instruments Act arises only where the complaint specifically pleads that each accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the firm&#039;s business at the relevant time. Mere assertions that one partner issued the cheque on behalf of all accused, or that the cheque represented a common liability, are insufficient without clear, specific and unambiguous averments as to each partner&#039;s role. On the pleaded facts, the complaint lacked the necessary foundational allegations and the materials relied on did not cure that defect, so the prosecution against the partners was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Jun 2022 11:31:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=683574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 736 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303032</link>
      <description>Vicarious criminal liability of partners under the Negotiable Instruments Act arises only where the complaint specifically pleads that each accused was in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the firm&#039;s business at the relevant time. Mere assertions that one partner issued the cheque on behalf of all accused, or that the cheque represented a common liability, are insufficient without clear, specific and unambiguous averments as to each partner&#039;s role. On the pleaded facts, the complaint lacked the necessary foundational allegations and the materials relied on did not cure that defect, so the prosecution against the partners was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=303032</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>