Question
In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court has
held that filing of Complaint for Dishonor of Cheque through power of attorney is permissible?Solution
In A C Narayan vs State of Maharashtra, the court held that that the powerofattorney holder may be allowed to file, appear and depose for the purpose of issue of process for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the NI Act. An exception to the above is when the powerofattorney holder of the complainant does not have a personal knowledge about the transactions then he cannot be examined. However, where the attorney holder of the complainant is in charge of the business of the complainant payee and the attorney holder alone is personally aware of the transactions, there is no reason why the attorney holder cannot depose as a witness. Nevertheless, an explicit assertion as to the knowledge of the powerofattorney holder about the transaction in question must be specified in the complaint.
“On whom does the burden of proof lie”. This is discussed in Section ……. Of Indian Evidence Act
Who serves as the Chairperson of the Board of Approval?
What is the punishment for mischief by fire?
What is meant by coercion as defined under section 15 of the Contract Act?
In which of the following cases, the Supreme Court of India declared section 303 of the Indian Penal Code (which mandates the award of death sentence to...
In the case of Taylor v. Caldwell relates to__________
It was held by the Court in the case of ________ “it is not for litigant to dictate to the Court as to how the proceedings should be conducted, it is ...
(PYQ) Under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the maximum imprisonment that can be awarded for cheque dishonour is:
In which of the following situations a joint sitting can be summoned of both houses of the parliament?
When any fact is especially within the knowledge of accused, then the burden of proving that fact is upon?