ExamVeda
Login
Home

In which of the following cases the Supreme Court held that...

This question belongs to Law Negotiable Instruments Act
Negotiable Instruments Act
?

In which of the following cases the Supreme Court held that the provisions of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 do not contain a condition that the prosecution of a company is sine qua non for prosecution of other persons. The liability of the Directors/Officers etc. is vicarious and will flow from the liability of the company/firm.

Answer & Solution
Correct Answer: Option D
Let's discuss the solution. Join the discussion
Examveda
Question posted by Examveda
Community

Join the Discussion

No comments yet Be the first to discuss this question.
Keep Learning

Related Questions on 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
More Related Questions on Negotiable Instruments Act