Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

shashwat poddar   11 August 2018

Section 138 case on sleeping partner of unregistered firm

ABC is an unregistered partnership firm in which A & B are the partners. A is the active partner as per deed and in actual whereas B is a housewife and is inactive and has no role in business of the firm. A has taken unsecured loans from the market in the name of firm and has issued PDCs to them. B has neither signed any cheques nor any balance sheet of the firm. As per books firm is in profit. But actually it's in huge losses. B has given retirement notice 8-10 months back when she came to know about the fraud. All the cheques have the date which is after the retirement but in some cases loan was taken before retirement. Now B is reverting to all the cheque bounce notices. Can B be held liable by the court? and what's the extent of B's liability? B had no role in business of the firm nor was given any share till date, B's capital is standing in the books of the ABC firm.


Learning

 2 Replies

Vinod shah (legal assistance for victims of system. findjobs02@gmail.com)     11 August 2018

In such cases mots of the time court does not issue process.

 

Even if the process is issed B CAN COME OUT THE CASES But will have contest and prove the retirment notice.

manoj   11 August 2018

A is only liable under section 138, B is not liable. Since he did not sign the cheques. Though A signed the cheques on behalf of the firm which represents the B also, but A alone issued the cheque, So A is only liable under Section 138 of NIAct. Though firm is unregistered 138 is attracted.

V E MANOJ KUMAR

ADVOCATE

CELL NO 8686159292

 

 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register