https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436474 The court held that the applicant, despite resigning as a Director, remained involved in the company's affairs and was properly summoned under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the complaints contained specific averments establishing the applicant's role in day-to-day operations, rejecting the request to quash the complaints. The court emphasized the need for evidence to substantiate claims and dismissed the applications, directing the trial to proceed without being swayed by the court's observations. The request for extension of interim relief was also denied. en-us Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Apr 2023 09:00:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436474 The court held that the applicant, despite resigning as a Director, remained involved in the company's affairs and was properly summoned under Sections 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the complaints contained specific averments establishing the applicant's role in day-to-day operations, rejecting the request to quash the complaints. The court emphasized the need for evidence to substantiate claims and dismissed the applications, directing the trial to proceed without being swayed by the court's observations. The request for extension of interim relief was also denied. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 11 Apr 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=436474