<?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>2012 (6) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459938</link>
    <description>A Hindu Undivided Family does not fall within the expression &quot;company&quot; or &quot;association of individuals&quot; in Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for fastening vicarious criminal liability. The court reasoned that, in a penal provision, the enlarged meaning of &quot;company&quot; must be read contextually and cannot be extended absent express inclusion. Mere family relationship among members does not supply the common volition and collective purpose required for an association of individuals. Accordingly, a member of an HUF cannot be prosecuted vicariously for a cheque offence committed by the karta, though prosecution may continue against the principal accused.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jan 2025 13:04:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=786478" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (6) TMI 933 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459938</link>
      <description>A Hindu Undivided Family does not fall within the expression &quot;company&quot; or &quot;association of individuals&quot; in Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for fastening vicarious criminal liability. The court reasoned that, in a penal provision, the enlarged meaning of &quot;company&quot; must be read contextually and cannot be extended absent express inclusion. Mere family relationship among members does not supply the common volition and collective purpose required for an association of individuals. Accordingly, a member of an HUF cannot be prosecuted vicariously for a cheque offence committed by the karta, though prosecution may continue against the principal accused.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=459938</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>