Petitioner Held Accountable for Husband's Financial Liabilities Under Special Power of Attorney
In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has dismissed a petition filed by Tripti Srivastva seeking to quash proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, related to the dishonour of a cheque. The judgment, delivered by Justice Alok Jain, emphasizes that a proprietor cannot evade liability under the said section when a Special Power of Attorney ratifies actions performed by a spouse.
The case involved Tripti Srivastva, the proprietor of a firm, and her husband, who is a director of another company. They were embroiled in a legal battle following a business dispute with respondent Yogesh Singla. A settlement agreement was reached, which stipulated that financial liabilities would be settled jointly by Srivastva's husband’s company. Despite this, Srivastva sought relief from the criminal proceedings, arguing that her husband had assumed the liability.
However, the court found that the Special Power of Attorney executed by Srivastva authorized her husband to act on her behalf, thereby binding her to the legal consequences of his actions. The court noted that all statutory ingredients necessary for the offence under Section 138 were satisfied, and the disputed factual issues were not suitable for adjudication under the court's inherent jurisdiction.
The court also referenced a similar case adjudicated by the Karnataka High Court, reinforcing the position that authorization not revoked prior to cheque issuance holds the party accountable. The judgment underscores the importance of trial proceedings for resolving such disputes and declines any interim relief to the petitioner.
The dismissal of the petition highlights the judiciary's commitment to uphold the integrity of financial transactions and enforce accountability in business dealings, even within familial relationships.
Bottom Line :
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138 Dishonour of cheque - Petition seeking quashing of summoning order and complaint - Petitioner No. 1 cannot escape liability under Section 138 when the Special Power of Attorney executed by her ratifies acts done by her husband - Statutory ingredients of Section 138 satisfied - Disputed questions of fact cannot be adjudicated under inherent jurisdiction - Petition dismissed.
Statutory provision(s): Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 528
Tripti Srivastva v. Yogesh Singla, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc id # 2967822
