vicarious liability

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Vicarious liability in a contempt case? Contempt jurisdiction knows no such concept: Supreme Court

“Merely because a subordinate official acted in disregard of an order passed by the Court, a liability cannot be fastened on a higher official in the absence of knowledge.”

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Explained| Sections 138 and 141 of NI Act: Vicarious liability of directors of a company for dishonour of cheques

Supreme Court: Explaining the law relating to vicarious liability of the Directors of a company under Sections 138 and 141 of the

Op EdsOP. ED.

Right to Digital Privacy:  A Critical and Comparative Analysis of the Draft Data Protection Bill and Role of Government Autonomy in Using Persuasive Technology to Affect Democracy

by Shivani Dewalla†

Case BriefsSupreme Court

Explained| Can Chairman, Directors, Managers, etc. be automatically summoned in a criminal case involving the company?

Summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter. Criminal law cannot be set into motion as a matter of course.

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Bom HC | Can administrator of WhatsApp group be held criminally liable for objectionable posts of a group member? HC answers

Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of Z.A. Haq and Amit B. Borkar, JJ., while addressing the matter, observed that: In the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

All HC | Summons sent to Director for dishonour of cheque under S. 138 NI Act, without prosecution against the Company. Is it permissible? Court answers

Allahabad High Court: Ravi Nath Tilhari, J., addressed a matter wherein a person being the director of the company signed a cheque

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Madras HC | Can a ‘Non-Executive Director’ who is not responsible for day-to-day affairs of company be made vicariously liable for offence committed by company? Court’s interpretation in light of S. 141 NI Act

Madras High Court: G.K. Ilathiraiyan, J., while addressing the instant matter, observed that, a person who is inducted as the Non-Executive Director of

Case BriefsHigh Courts

All HC | Principle contained in S. 141 of NI Act is not applicable to a sole-proprietary concern, firm need not be arraigned as an accused while making a claim for recovery under S. 138 of the NI Act

Allahabad High Court: While deciding a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, Suresh Kumar Gupta, J., dismissed the

Case BriefsForeign Courts

SL CoA | Court rejects appeal in case of murder; convicts to be hanged

Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: A Division Bench of K.K. Wickremasinghe and K. Priyantha Fernando, JJ.,

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCDRC | Medical Negligence | Hospital found vicariously liable for negligence in treatment of patient

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): Justice V.K. Jain (Presiding Member), while disposing of the present application with respect to negligence of

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

SAT | SEBI’s two-year ban on auditing firm PWC quashed; however, penalty amount for breach of duty upheld

Securities and Appellate Tribunal (SAT): Tarun Agarwala, J. (Presiding Officer) and Dr C. K. G. Nair, Member quashed an order passed by

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

SAT | Director can only be prosecuted on sufficient evidence of his active role or where statutory regime attracts vicarious liability

Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT): Coram of Justice Tarun Agarwala (Presiding Officer), Dr C.K.G. Nair (Member), and Justice M.T. Joshi (Judicial Member), quashed an

Case BriefsTribunals/Commissions/Regulatory Bodies

NCDRC | Doctor is vicariously liable for the acts of his team which assists him in every sphere of rendering treatment to the patient

National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC): A Coram of R.K. Agrawal (President), J. and M. Shreesha (Member) allowed an appeal against the

Case BriefsHigh Courts

Del HC | No vicarious liability on ‘Non-Executive Nominee Director’ for dishonour of cheque unless he is shown to be at company’s helm of affairs

Delhi High Court: The Bench of R.K. Gauba, J. interfered with the impugned order passed by Metropolitan Magistrate and quashed the summon issued

Case BriefsForeign Courts

Railways vicariously liable for the negligence of its employees within the scope of employment

Supreme Court of Sri Lanka: The Supreme Court affirmed the High Court’s award of Rs. 3,500,000/- as damages to the plaintiff in