NCLT /138

Not the Director, but the Company itself should be sued in its name.

Lord Denning in Tamlin v. Hansaford in which the learned Judge observed:

"In the eye of the law, the corporation is its own master and is answerable as fully as any other person or corporation. It is not the Crown and has none of the immunities or privileges of the Crown. Its servants are not civil servants, and its property is not Crown property. It is as much bound by Acts of Parliament as any other subject of the King. It is, of course, a public authority and its purposes, no doubt, are public purposes, but it is not a government department nor do its powers fall within the province of government".

Since the company itself filed the Company petition before NCLT, for appointing the IPR and for recovery of the dues, I do not think that there will be no use.  The bouncing of Cheque will also be another good ground for the Corporate Creditor to get admission of the Company petition file before NCLT.  

very useful info! thank for sharing with us. 

very useful info! thank for sharing with us. 

YES YOU CAN FILE THE CASES FOR THOSE OFFENCES, BEFORE THE LEARNED MAGISTRATE.

THANKS

ASHOK KUMAR SINGH,

ADVOCATE

Dear Sir 

There has been no judicial pronouncement on the issue of whether the corporate insolvency resolution process period will also cover proceedings pending against the corporate debtor under section 138 of the NI Act. The corporate insolvency resolution process period is to apply to all proceedings where the primary liability is that of the corporate debtor and in a case of cheque bouncing, the primary liability is of the corporate debtor as the director signs a cheque only on behalf of the corporate debtor. 

Regards

Ashish

Dear Sir 

There has been no judicial pronouncement on the issue of whether the corporate insolvency resolution process period will also cover proceedings pending against the corporate debtor under section 138 of the NI Act. The corporate insolvency resolution process period is to apply to all proceedings where the primary liability is that of the corporate debtor and in a case of cheque bouncing, the primary liability is of the corporate debtor as the director signs a cheque only on behalf of the corporate debtor. 

Regards

Ashish

Since the Director who issued and signed PDC was aware of the situation during insovency proceeding. He can also be made a party to the cheque bouncing case along with the company.

But case should be filed before the company is declared insolvent.

Regards

Adv. Rohit Dalmia

9324538481

Originally posted by : Anshul Maheshwari
	Company director issued post dated cheques against full and final settlement after filing insolvency. The cheques got bounced as the account was freezed pending insolvency. Can we file a case against the director under 138And also under 420/120B

1.  Since the cheques were issued  "AFTER", filing insolvency proceedings, it amounts to prosecutable offences under 420 /120B, for sure.

2. File 138 N.I.Act, case on:

a) Company name

b) ALL in-charge directors names.

Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal
VISIT: www.chshelpforum.com

Originally posted by : Anshul Maheshwari
	Company director issued post dated cheques against full and final settlement after filing insolvency. The cheques got bounced as the account was freezed pending insolvency. Can we file a case against the director under 138And also under 420/120B

1.  Since the cheques were issued  "AFTER", filing insolvency proceedings, it amounts to prosecutable offences under 420 /120B, for sure.

2. File 138 N.I.Act, case on:

a) Company name

b) ALL in-charge directors names.

Keep Smiling .... Hemant Agarwal
VISIT: www.chshelpforum.com