https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466652 The article examines whether a company may file a complaint under Section 138 NI Act through its manager and whether a magistrate erred in returning such complaint. It applies the statutory restriction that cognizance under Section 138 is limited to the payee or holder in due course, recognises that a company is a legal entity that must act through a human agent, and adopts a practical construction permitting representation by an authorised person connected with the company to give effect to the statute. Outcome: such a complaint is maintainable and the magistrate's return was incorrect. en-us Mon, 20 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 16 Feb 2026 12:24:21 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466652 The article examines whether a company may file a complaint under Section 138 NI Act through its manager and whether a magistrate erred in returning such complaint. It applies the statutory restriction that cognizance under Section 138 is limited to the payee or holder in due course, recognises that a company is a legal entity that must act through a human agent, and adopts a practical construction permitting representation by an authorised person connected with the company to give effect to the statute. Outcome: such a complaint is maintainable and the magistrate's return was incorrect. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 20 Apr 1992 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466652