Whether Complaint u/s 138 through authorize signatory maintaina or not

669 votes

Hi,
A complaint under section 138 of the NI Act, 1881 against a firm through an authorized signatory(AS) alone, is not maintainable against the said AS, however if the proprietor has also been a made a party in that complaint, then the complaint would be maintainable against the proprietor . It is further to be noted that, even if the AS had signed the cheque in question on the behalf of the firm, he would still not be liable under section 138, since he is only a "mandate holder" and not the drawer of the cheque within the meaning of "drawer" under the Act, as the same was in the account of the concerned firm.
As far as the query regarding verification is concerned, there is no verification required in a 138 complaint under the NI Act, 1881 at the end of the complaint. A verification is required only in a plaint and written statement filed in a civil suit.

Feel free to ask for any further clarifications.

Advocate Swati Ghildiyal LawRato

633 votes

complaint through authorised representative/ power of attorney holder is maintainable. Verification is not required in complaint under section 138 N.I. Act. Verification is required only in civil matters.

Advocate Prakash Khandelwal LawRato

827 votes

Yes, complaint through Authorised representative is maintainable missing of variation may be corrected later if you will protest it. You can not get benefit for that. Main legal point is to prove liability, which is difficult for him, if you will defend well. You should discuss for that. Visit personally with complaint for detail advice.

Advocate Hira Lal Jha LawRato