https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94710 HC held that discussions on converting a bridge loan into a term loan amounted only to a proposal and did not result in novation under S.62 Contract Act. Consequently, the original amended Bridge Loan Agreement subsisted, the security cheques represented a legally enforceable debt when presented, and complaints under S.138 NI Act are maintainable. On vicarious liability under S.141 NI Act, HC ruled that specific averments of being in charge of day-to-day affairs are mandatory; mere designation as Director is insufficient. Proceedings against the non-executive "professional" Director were quashed, while petitions by other accused Directors were dismissed. en-us Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:10 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94710 HC held that discussions on converting a bridge loan into a term loan amounted only to a proposal and did not result in novation under S.62 Contract Act. Consequently, the original amended Bridge Loan Agreement subsisted, the security cheques represented a legally enforceable debt when presented, and complaints under S.138 NI Act are maintainable. On vicarious liability under S.141 NI Act, HC ruled that specific averments of being in charge of day-to-day affairs are mandatory; mere designation as Director is insufficient. Proceedings against the non-executive "professional" Director were quashed, while petitions by other accused Directors were dismissed. Highlights Indian Laws Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:10 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=94710