<?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>2005 (12) TMI 606 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307356</link>
    <description>A managing partner who signs a cheque on behalf of a partnership firm may be treated as the drawer for dishonour proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, even if the firm is not separately prosecuted under Section 141. The analysis treats the firm as a compendious name for its partners and states that liability can arise where the complaint and admitted facts show the accused acted as managing partner and was in charge of the business. It also notes that a cheque issued towards a debt or other liability falls within Section 138. On sentence, the custodial term was reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, with compensation and default imprisonment maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Apr 2023 17:15:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=710087" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (12) TMI 606 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307356</link>
      <description>A managing partner who signs a cheque on behalf of a partnership firm may be treated as the drawer for dishonour proceedings under the Negotiable Instruments Act, even if the firm is not separately prosecuted under Section 141. The analysis treats the firm as a compendious name for its partners and states that liability can arise where the complaint and admitted facts show the accused acted as managing partner and was in charge of the business. It also notes that a cheque issued towards a debt or other liability falls within Section 138. On sentence, the custodial term was reduced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, with compensation and default imprisonment maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=307356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>