https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429792 The High Court of Delhi quashed the summoning order against the petitioner, an Independent/Non-Executive Director, in a case under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court held that the complaint lacked specific averments detailing the petitioner's role in the conduct of the company's business, which is essential to fasten vicarious liability. The court emphasized that merely holding a designation is insufficient for liability; specific involvement in the company's affairs must be demonstrated. en-us Wed, 02 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 04 Nov 2022 11:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429792 The High Court of Delhi quashed the summoning order against the petitioner, an Independent/Non-Executive Director, in a case under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court held that the complaint lacked specific averments detailing the petitioner's role in the conduct of the company's business, which is essential to fasten vicarious liability. The court emphasized that merely holding a designation is insufficient for liability; specific involvement in the company's affairs must be demonstrated. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429792