https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777837 The HC held that arraignment of the petitioner individually without impleading the firm was prima facie inconsistent with the principle of vicarious liability under Section 141 of the NI Act, but the defect was curable. The complainant was permitted to move to amend the complaint and memo of parties to implead necessary parties and the firm. Given prolonged delay largely attributable to the complainant, the court dismissed the petitioner's petition while directing equitable compensation to the petitioner and permitting amendment rather than quashing the proceedings. en-us Mon, 01 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Sep 2025 17:15:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777837 The HC held that arraignment of the petitioner individually without impleading the firm was prima facie inconsistent with the principle of vicarious liability under Section 141 of the NI Act, but the defect was curable. The complainant was permitted to move to amend the complaint and memo of parties to implead necessary parties and the firm. Given prolonged delay largely attributable to the complainant, the court dismissed the petitioner's petition while directing equitable compensation to the petitioner and permitting amendment rather than quashing the proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 01 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777837