Text Practice Mode


created Dec 6th 2018, 05:15 by MahaveerYadav



409 words
43 completed
The trial Court shall expeditiously dispose of the matter in accordance with law. The Trial Court is directed not to grant any unreasonable adjournments to any of the parties to the proceedings. Another discharge application was filed which was dismissed on 3-8-2000. The application for quashing of the proceeding was filed thereafter. The High Court by reason of the impugned judgment opining that the allegations. contained in the complaint petition as against respondent No. 1 are vague and indefinite and do not satisfy the requirements Act (for short "the Act"), held that no case had been made out for issuance of any summons against her. As regards the contention raised by the appellant herein that the involvement of respondent No. 1 in the High Court opined that the same by itself did not disclose commission of any offence on the day of commission of the offence. Appellant has filed the appeal aggrieved by the said judgment. Requirements of law for proceeding against the Directors of the Company for their purported constructive liability came up for consideration in this case before a Division Bench of this Court, wherein the following questions were posed: Whether for purposes of section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, it is sufficient if the substance of the allegation read as a whole fulfils the requirements of the said section and it is not necessary to specifically state in the complaint  that the person accused  was in-charge of, or responsible for, the conduct of the business of the company. The basic facts of the case are not in dispute. Appellants herein are the heirs and legal representatives of the coolies travelling from Kankanwadi to Saundatti in the State of Karanataka in a tractor trailer. The said tractor trailer met with an accident allegedly owing to rash and negligent driving on the part of its driver. Out of 44 persons travelling in the said tractor trailer, nine persons died and others received serious injuries. Appellants herein filed claim petitions in terms of section 166 of the Act read with section 140 thereof before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal'). By reason of an order dated 19-9-2004, the learned Tribunal directed both the owner as also respondent No. 1 (Insurance Company) to deposit a sum of Rs. 50,000/- each for every deceased within a period of one month. Aggrieved by and dissatisfied therewith, respondent No. 1 herein preferred appeals before the High Court.  

saving score / loading statistics ...