In which of the following case the Supreme Court held that the persons who are sought to be made vicariously liable for a criminal offence under section 141 should be at the time the offfence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. Every person connected w ith the company shall not fall within the ambit of the provision?
A. National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. v. Harmeet Singh Paintal, (2010) 3 SCC 330
B. State of Bihar v. Kalyanpur Cement Ltd. (2010) 3 SCC 274
C. Rakesh Kumar v. U.P.I.D.C. Ltd., AIR 2010 SC 2451
D. None of the above
Answer: Option A
This Question Belongs to Law >> Negotiable Instruments Act
The term 'legal representative' in section 29 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
A. Does not include executors or administrator (Rama v. Praoin, AIR 1926 Mad 389)
B. Includes executors or administrator (K. Subbanna v. K. Subbarayudu, AIR 1926 Mad 390)
C. Includes executors but does not include administrators (P. Nayar v. T. Ramanna, AIR 1929 Mad 389)
D. Includes only administrators but does not include executors (P. K. Pati v. Damodar Sahu, AIR 1953 Ori 179)
In the case of a promissory note which is not negotiable
A. Notice of dishonour is compulsory
B. No notice of dishonour is necessary
C. Negotiable Instruments Act is silent on this aspect
D. Indorsement is necessary
The endorsement of a negotiable instrument is followed by delivery
A. Yes
B. No
C. Both (A) and (B)
D. None of the above
'Truncated Cheque' is dealt within which section of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881?
A. Section 5
B. Section 6
C. Section 7
D. Section 8
Join The Discussion