Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + HC Companies Law - 2010 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (12) TMI 1067 - HC - Companies LawWhether the petitioner, who has been arrayed as A3 in a private complaint given under section 138 read with section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, was in charge of and was responsible for the conduct of the business of the company? Held that:- When there is no liability against the petitioner as a director of a company, no purpose would be served to allow the proceedings to continue even at the stage of arguments. The petitioner is an aged lady, who resides at New Delhi. The records would show that non-bailable warrant was issued for her non-appearance. Therefore, I am satisfied that the continuance of the proceedings is only harassment to the petitioner who cannot be fastened with liability under section 141 of the Act. It is also pertinent to note that the respondent-complainant can proceed against the company and the director who was actually in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company. Therefore, no prejudice or loss would be caused to the complainant if the proceedings are quashed as far as the petitioner is concerned. Otherwise, the continuance of which will be an abuse of process of court even if it is for one more day. Appeal allowed.
|