Corporate Law : Explore directors' liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act during the moratorium period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy...
Corporate Law : Explore the mounting backlog of cheque bounce cases in India, the legal procedures involved, the jurisdiction of cases, and how to...
Corporate Law : As per section 143-A of Negotiable Instrument Act, the court trying an offense under section 138 may order the drawer of the chequ...
Company Law : Explore the onus to prove in cheque bounce cases (Section 138 NI Act) through a comprehensive analysis of relevant provisions and ...
Corporate Law : The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred as NI Act) is the safety net for those creditors (deemed or actual) who...
Corporate Law : The Modi government in a bit to improve ease of doing business and unclogging courts has decided that 39 sections in 19 differen...
Corporate Law : Lok Sabha passes Negotiable Instrument (Amendment) Bill, 2018 a bill further to amend the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by whic...
Corporate Law : It is, therefore, proposed to introduce the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Bill, 2017 to provide, inter alia, for the followin...
Corporate Law : Proposal to promulgate the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Ordinance, 2015 The Union Cabinet, chaired by the Prime Minister Shr...
Corporate Law : The main amendment included in this is the stipulation that the offence of rejection/return of cheque u/s 138 of NI Act will be en...
Corporate Law : Madhya Pradesh HC ruled IBC proceedings do not exempt signatories from liability under NI Act. Court upheld Rs. 13.73 lakh deposit...
Corporate Law : Regarding Section 14 of the IBC, court clarified that moratorium only applies to corporate debtor, not to natural persons like dir...
Corporate Law : Explore the Supreme Court judgment on whether directors who resigned can be held liable for dishonored negotiable instruments. Und...
Corporate Law : Karnataka High Court revolved around Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 in case of Shashikala Jayaram vs. Appayappa - ...
Corporate Law : No person should accept any loan or deposit of a sum of Rs.20,000/- or more otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account p...
Corporate Law : Pursuant to directions of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, following Practice Directions are issued to all Courts dealing with case...
Finance : Central Government hereby declares every Saturday as a public holiday for Life Insurance Corporation of India, with immediate effe...
Corporate Law : This Act may be called the Negotiable Instruments (Amendment) Act, 2018. (2) It shall come into force on such date as the Central ...
Corporate Law : MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE (Legislative Department) New Delhi, the 29th December, 2015 The following Act of Parliament received t...
Corporate Law : NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of article 123 of the Constitution, the President is pleased to p...
Madhya Pradesh HC ruled IBC proceedings do not exempt signatories from liability under NI Act. Court upheld Rs. 13.73 lakh deposit for sentence suspension.
Regarding Section 14 of the IBC, court clarified that moratorium only applies to corporate debtor, not to natural persons like directors for their vicarious liability.
Explore the Supreme Court judgment on whether directors who resigned can be held liable for dishonored negotiable instruments. Understand the legal implications and ramifications.
Karnataka High Court revolved around Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 in case of Shashikala Jayaram vs. Appayappa – can cheque issued by spouse be prosecutable?
No person should accept any loan or deposit of a sum of Rs.20,000/- or more otherwise than by an account payee cheque or account payee bank draft. Where a person advance cash more than Rs.20,000/- to another person, restriction on cash advances was, in fact, on the taker and not on the person who made an advance.
Read about the Delhi High Court’s decision upholding simultaneous arbitration and Section 138 NI Act proceedings, emphasizing their separate causes of action.
Madras High Court quashes a cheque dishonour case, ruling an illegal claim cannot be construed as legal. Detailed analysis of Davidraj Vs V. Pavel’s case
Kerala High Court held that a trust, either private or public/charitable or otherwise, is a juristic person who is liable for punishment for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act).
Andhra Pradesh High Court held that the complainant miserably failed to prove the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 against the respondent/accused beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal dismissed.
Calcutta High Court held that order of acquittal set aside as recorded on account of misreading of evidence. Evidence on record sufficient to hold respondent liable for committing offence u/s. 138 of N.I. Act.
