<?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>2019 (7) TMI 2041 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458275</link>
    <description>Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act bars only civil suits to enforce contractual rights and does not extend to criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In a cheque dishonour case involving a partnership firm, Section 141 applies vicarious liability principles to firms as well as companies, so the firm must be arraigned as an accused when the cheque is issued on its behalf. Registration status of the firm does not change that requirement. The complaint was unsustainable because no statutory notice was issued to the firm and the firm was not made an accused; proceedings against the partners alone could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:52:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=774426" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 2041 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458275</link>
      <description>Section 69(2) of the Partnership Act bars only civil suits to enforce contractual rights and does not extend to criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In a cheque dishonour case involving a partnership firm, Section 141 applies vicarious liability principles to firms as well as companies, so the firm must be arraigned as an accused when the cheque is issued on its behalf. Registration status of the firm does not change that requirement. The complaint was unsustainable because no statutory notice was issued to the firm and the firm was not made an accused; proceedings against the partners alone could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458275</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>