S. 141 ni act - who or what is a company?
VVS Ramaikrishna
(Querist) 29 October 2012
This query is : Resolved
To me and as per the Webster and Oxford Dictionaries,
a Company is an association of people to perform certain functions.
and
a Person is an individual human being.
A company is not and can not be a n individual human being.
A company may have legal status and can be given the status of a "Juristic Entity" but it can not be a person.
Also, to me the Negotiable Instruments Act was drafted, amended from time to time to protect the holder of a cheque which is dishonored because the offenders are unscrupulous and deceptively cunning to evade or wriggle out of the the punitive provisions of Law.
Courts have a high responsibility to not delivering injustice which is what constitution states and any ordinary or professional person believes; for which reason alone a person approaches the courts of Law for justice. Otherwise it is anarchy and strong arm methods only which no civilized society can allow.
VVS Ramaikrishna
(Querist) 29 October 2012
Thank you experts.
may I know if any comment contrary to opinion in a order (supreme court) would amount to a crime or contempt of court?
VVS Ramaikrishna
(Querist) 29 October 2012
Is it correct to state that a company is a 'Juristic Person" when a company is not an individual human being?
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2012
Please post your real problem for solution, if desired.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 29 October 2012
Academic Query
ajay sethi
(Expert) 29 October 2012
we dont reply to academic queirs
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 30 October 2012
academic query.
VVS Ramaikrishna
(Querist) 30 October 2012
Thank you Experts and Mr. Dhingra.
Yes< I am looking for a solution in the aftermath of my complaint case resulting in acquittal of the accused u/s 141 NI Act because the company is not made a party and the judgement of Sep 2012 quotes Aneetha Hada vs Godfather Travels dt. 27/04/2012.
1. S. 141 does not state anywhere that Directors can not be prosecuted if company is not made an accused (Complaint was drafted by Lawyer)
2. Accused moved an application in 2009 to out rightly dismiss the complaint because company is not made an accused.
3. The said application was dismissed on account of being unwarranted, not maintainable and has no merits, in 2009.
4. The said order was not challenged by the Accused.
5. But 2012 judgement acquits the accused on the very same grounds on which three years back an application was dismissed as not having any merits.
6. The judgement is by the same court and not any higher court and both the orders are from the same proceedings spread over FOUR YEARS.
7. Accused admitted issuing cheques, dishonor of the cheque, not paying despite receiving notice of offense u/s 138.
My predicament is how an order can be reversed during the same proceedings and after three years and on same grounds?
Secondly, the supreme court judgement of April 27 2012 states that a company is a "Juristic Person" whereas a company can be a "Juristic Entity" but not a person.
Also, the very provision of s. 141 NI Act does not any where create a ban or taboo to prosecute the Directors when company is not made an accused although it says that all persons responsible for the company at the time offense was committed can be proceeded.
Further, the section defines a "company" to be a firm etc. where the "Director" is explained to mean partner.
And when the Directors who formed the company as promoter directors are tried and the company later vanishes from the known addresses (even internet) when the Directors also have left the city to scout for, perhaps, more victims elsewhere and in the absence of the engaged lawyer's negative participation in the proceedings despite taking heavy fee, what options am I left with to recover my money as the limitation u/o 37 CPC also got expired.
This is my predicament and if the experts can guide or provide a solution, I would be grateful as today I'm a financial wreck and a Senior citizen with failing health.
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 30 October 2012
Without making the Company a party, the case would fail.
It is the Company who defaulted the payment for which the Director is to be punished.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 30 October 2012
i agree company has to be made a accused .
