https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446228 The Madras HC dismissed a criminal petition challenging vicarious liability of a director under Section 141(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court held that merely extracting statutory language is insufficient to establish director liability for Section 138 offences. The complaint must demonstrate the director's role in business conduct and company management. In this case, the petitioner-director had guaranteed a business loan and could not deny knowledge of borrowing or cheque issuance despite not being the signatory. The court found sufficient averments to establish prima facie liability. en-us Wed, 01 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 29 Nov 2023 07:31:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446228 The Madras HC dismissed a criminal petition challenging vicarious liability of a director under Section 141(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The court held that merely extracting statutory language is insufficient to establish director liability for Section 138 offences. The complaint must demonstrate the director's role in business conduct and company management. In this case, the petitioner-director had guaranteed a business loan and could not deny knowledge of borrowing or cheque issuance despite not being the signatory. The court found sufficient averments to establish prima facie liability. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 01 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=446228