https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461050 Specific averments in a complaint can sustain proceedings against a director under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act where the pleading states that the director was an authorised signatory, responsible for the day-to-day business, and acted with the other director in issuing cheques and placing purchase orders. At the summoning and quashing stage, those assertions must be taken at face value, and disputed factual questions cannot be resolved in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The complaint was therefore held to disclose sufficient material to proceed, and quashing was not warranted. en-us Fri, 03 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2025 01:50:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461050 Specific averments in a complaint can sustain proceedings against a director under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act where the pleading states that the director was an authorised signatory, responsible for the day-to-day business, and acted with the other director in issuing cheques and placing purchase orders. At the summoning and quashing stage, those assertions must be taken at face value, and disputed factual questions cannot be resolved in proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The complaint was therefore held to disclose sufficient material to proceed, and quashing was not warranted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 03 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461050