<?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>1998 (1) TMI 542 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466654</link>
    <description>Complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act may be filed by a company through a director without an express board resolution or power of attorney where the director is connected with the company&#039;s affairs and has authority to bind it. A company, as a legal person, acts through human agency; the relevant inquiry is whether the representative&#039;s role and conduct establish that authority. Where the director conducted the company&#039;s transactions and received the disputed cheques, representation for filing the complaints was sufficient. The complaints were therefore maintainable, and the quashal petitions were dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2026 13:08:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=886590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (1) TMI 542 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466654</link>
      <description>Complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act may be filed by a company through a director without an express board resolution or power of attorney where the director is connected with the company&#039;s affairs and has authority to bind it. A company, as a legal person, acts through human agency; the relevant inquiry is whether the representative&#039;s role and conduct establish that authority. Where the director conducted the company&#039;s transactions and received the disputed cheques, representation for filing the complaints was sufficient. The complaints were therefore maintainable, and the quashal petitions were dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=466654</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>