--- title: "Krishna Texport & Capital Markets Ltd. vs. Ila A. Agrawal & Ors." date: 2015-05-10 author: "Shrishail Kittad" url: https://www.indialaw.in/blog/negotiable-instrument/krishna-texport-capital-markets-ltd-vs-ila-a-agrawal-ors/ --- # Krishna Texport & Capital Markets Ltd. vs. Ila A. Agrawal & Ors. Posted On - 10 May, 2015 • By - [Shrishail Kittad](https://www.indialaw.in/people/adv-shrishail-kittad/ "Posts by Shrishail Kittad") *By Ashish Kumar Gill* The Negotiable Instrument Act,1881 (‘Act’) has a history of being one of the oldest acts to be in existence since the time “British Raj” came to its end in India and also an act, the interpretation of which has been a concern of constant modifications in various cases time and again. In a recent case of *Krishna Texport & Capital Markets Ltd. vs.Ila A. Agrawal & Ors*[[1]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftn1)..The Honorable Supreme Court of India in its attempt to clarify the issues pertaining to Section 138 of the Act overruled the judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court in *B. Raman & Ors. Vs. M/s. Shasun Chemicals and Drugs Ltd.*[[2]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftn2), wherein it was concluded by the Honorable High Court that the service of Notice as envisaged under Section 138 to all the Directors and persons concerned is a mandatory obligation before a complaint could be filed against any wrong committed on their part. Further, it was added by the Honorable High Court that a non- compliance of such a mandatory requisite would outlaw the legal proceedings of any kind against the Directors. The instant Criminal “Appeal by Special Leave” is directed against the order dated 6.5.2008 passed by the Honorable High Court of Judicature at Bombay rejecting Criminal Application No. 2174 of 2007. In the case a notice under Section 138 of the of the Act was issued on behalf of the appellant to M/S Indo French Bio Tech Enterprises Ltd (‘Company’) on 14.09.1996. The notice stated that a cheque bearing No. 364776 dated 8.9.1996 drawn by the Company on Dena Bank, New Marine Lines, Mumbai in favour of the appellant returned on 10.9.1996 with endorsement “funds insufficient”. The notice therefore was called upon the addressee to make the payment of the cheque amount within 15 days of the receipt of the notice so furnished. The aforesaid notice remained un-reverted. The appellant thereafter filed Complaint Case No. 243/S/1996 before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 5th Court at Dadar, Mumbai against the Company, Mr. K.J. Bodiwala, the Chairman and Managing Director of the Company and 11 other directors including respondent nos.1 and 2 namely Ms. Ila A. Agrawal and Mr. Prafulla Ranadive. In so far as the directors are concerned, it was averred that they were in-charge of the business of the Company and its day to day affairs and were hence liable. During the pendency of said complaint case, the process issued against Accused Nos. 3 to 5, 7, 9 to 13 was recalled and due to the death of one of the Directors,Mr. Bodiwala the proceedings as against him also abated, which left the Company and the present respondent nos. 1 and 2, Accused Nos. 6 and 8 respectively, in the array of accused. Appellant stated that the separate notices to the directors were additionally issued but at the stage of evidence it turned out that no individual notices were given to the directors pertaining to the aforesaid cheque. The Metropolitan Magistrate vide order dated 30.4.2007 convicted the Company but acquitted respondent nos. 1 and 2. The Metropolitan Magistrate relied upon the judgment of the B. Raman case[[3]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftn3), and decided that notice under Section 138 of the Act was required to be issued to every Director and for non- compliance of such mandatory requirement, respondent nos. 1 and 2 could not be held responsible and not to be proceeded against. The appellant being aggrieved filed Criminal Application No. 2174 of 2007 in the High Court seeking leave to prefer appeal against the judgment acquitting respondent nos. 1 and 2. The High Court also relied on the judgment of the Division Bench of Madras High Court in  B. Raman case[[4]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftn4) that it to be mandatory to have issued separate notices to all the directors and vicarious liability of the offence under Section 138 of the Act cannot be fixed upon them without serving the separate notice. The High Court had taken the same view and dismissed the appeal. The Honorable Supreme Court while deciding the question whether the notice under Section 138 of the Act is mandatorily required to be sent to the directors of a Company before a complaint could be filed against such directors along with the Company observed that the there is nothing in Section 138 of the NI Act which may even remotely suggest issuance of notice to anyone other than the drawer. The Honorable Supreme Court went through the interpretation of the Sections 138 and 141. While interpreting the Section 141 of the Act, the Supreme Court explained that plain reading of Section 141 of the Act provides that if the person committing an offence under Section 138 is a Company, every director of such Company who was in charge of and responsible for its affairs and who guided actions to that Company for conduct of its business shall also be deemed to be vicariously liable as company is a juristic entity. Section 141 of the Act does not provide any requirement to send notices separately to the directors. Directors, who are in charge of the affairs of the Company and responsible for the affairs of the Company, would be aware of the receipt of notice by the Company under Section 138.Therefore, the Apex Court held that Section 138 of the Act does not admit of any necessity or scope for reading into it the requirement that the directors of the Company in question must also be issued individual notices under Section 138 of the Act. Hence the appeal is allowed. The Honorable Supreme Court overruled the decision of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court[[5]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftn5) and remits the matter to High Court for fresh consideration. The judgment, if critically analyzed can take a heavy toll on the Company holders and the Institution runners for the interpretation of Section 138 of the Act been in a manner as concluded by the Apex Court would in a way bring in question the credibility of the director/person not genuinely liable for the wrong. Therefore, it is hereby opined on a personal level that the Judgment needs some further consideration on the issue and a serious attempt towards the consolidation of the “section in question”. [[1]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftnref1) *CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1220 of 2009 decided on 06.05.2015* [[2]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftnref2) *2006 Cril. L.J. 4552* [[3]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftnref3) *B. Raman & Ors. Vs. M/s. Shasun Chemicals and Drugs Ltd,2006 Cril. L.J. 4552* [[4]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftnref4) *Ibid* [[5]](http://www.indialaw.in/blog/blog/?doing_wp_cron=1441534503.9356551170349121093750#_ftnref5) *ibid* [Download PDF](https://www.indialaw.in/blog/negotiable-instrument/krishna-texport-capital-markets-ltd-vs-ila-a-agrawal-ors//pdf/) --- # IndiaLaw LLP — Offices & Contact Details --- ## General Contact | | | |---|---| | **Website** | https://www.indialaw.in | | **Primary email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Primary phone** | +91 836-9995919 | | **Contact form** | https://www.indialaw.in/connect/ | | **Careers (separate channel)** | https://www.indialaw.in/careers/ | --- ## All Offices (9 locations across 8 cities) ### 1. Mumbai — Registered Office & Head Office (Apeejay Chambers) | | | |---|---| | **Address** | Apeejay Chambers, Ground Floor, Wallace Street, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 | | **Phone** | [022-6924-7400](tel:02269247400) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ | | **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate · IP | | **Notes** | The HQ. 5 partners based here. Handles PAN-India litigation, arbitration, corporate, banking, IP and real estate practice. Largest team across all offices. | ### 2. Mumbai — Non-Litigation Office (Excelsior, Fort) | | | |---|---| | **Address** | 4th Floor, New Excelsior Theatre Pvt. Ltd., Amrit Keshav Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 | | **Phone** | [022-697-40500](tel:022-697-40500) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/mumbai/ | | **Practice focus** | Non-litigation only — consultations, negotiations, transactional work | | **Notes** | Opened 2024. Litigation and arbitration remain at the Apeejay Chambers head office. | ### 3. Delhi | | | |---|---| | **Address** | Flat No. 1107 & 1108, Prakashdeep Building, Tolstoy Marg, Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001 | | **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/delhi/ | | **Practice focus** | Litigation · Arbitration · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Corporate · Banking · Real Estate | | **Notes** | 3 partners based here. Located near the Supreme Court of India, Delhi High Court and other appellate bodies. | ### 4. Kolkata | | | |---|---| | **Address** | Centre Point Building, Room No. 214, 2nd Floor, Premises No. 21, Hemanta Basu Sarani, Opp. Great Eastern Hotel, P.S. Hare Street, Kolkata – 700 001, West Bengal | | **Phone** | [+91 33 4813 1001](tel:+913348131001) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/kolkata/ | | **Practice focus** | Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Commercial & Civil Litigation · Arbitration · Banking Litigation · Real Estate · Labour & Employment · Consumer | | **Notes** | Advises banks, NBFCs, MSMEs and corporates on transactions and dispute resolution. Works in close coordination with the Mumbai HO. | ### 5. Chennai | | | |---|---| | **Address** | GF-A, 19 Casa Major Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008 | | **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/chennai/ | | **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate | | **Notes** | Full-fledged office with experienced legal team. Supported by Mumbai HO. | ### 6. Bengaluru (Bangalore) | | | |---|---| | **Address** | INDIALAW LLP, No. 7 Chinnaswamy Mudaliar Road, Shivaji Nagar, Bangalore – 560 051 | | **Phone** | [080-4167-2444](tel:08041672444) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/bengaluru/ | | **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate · Family Laws · Labour | | **Notes** | Located near Bangalore High Court. Handles corporate, commercial, banking and matrimonial disputes. | ### 7. Hyderabad | | | |---|---| | **Address** | 403, 4th Floor, Sanatana Ecstasy Building, beside Tanishq Show Room, Himayathnagar, Hyderabad – 500 029, Telangana | | **Phone** | [040-6666-5166](tel:04066665166) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/hyderabad/ | | **Practice focus** | Litigation · Banking · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate | | **Notes** | Particularly well known for complex banking matters and real estate transactions. | ### 8. Cochin (Kochi) | | | |---|---| | **Address** | Second Floor, Pulikkal Building, K.K. Padmanabhan Road, Ernakulam North – 682 018, Kerala | | **Phone** | [0484-3583961](tel:04843583961) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/cochin/ | | **Practice focus** | Litigation · Insolvency & Bankruptcy · Real Estate | | **Notes** | Commercial disputes, property litigation, financial-claim arbitrations and real estate transactions. | ### 9. Noida (NCR) | | | |---|---| | **Address** | No. 16 & 17, Silver Offices, 17th Floor, Wave One, Sector 18, Noida – 201 301 | | **Phone** | (general line: +91 836-9995919) | | **Email** | contact@indialaw.in | | **Page** | https://www.indialaw.in/noida/ | | **Practice focus** | Aviation · Insurance · Mergers & Acquisitions · Corporate | | **Office head** | **Mr. Dinesh Gupta** (joined August 2025 to lead and expand the corporate practice) | | **Notes** | Newest office. Sector-focused on highly regulated industries serving NCR-based clients. | --- ## Quick-Dial Phone List | Office | Phone | |---|---| | Mumbai HO (Apeejay) | 022-6924-7400 | | Mumbai Excelsior | 022-697-40500 | | Kolkata | +91 33 4813 1001 | | Bengaluru | 080-4167-2444 | | Hyderabad | 040-6666-5166 | | Cochin | 0484-3583961 | | **General / Marketing line** | **+91 836-9995919** | Delhi, Chennai and Noida route through the general number. --- ## Social Channels - LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/indialaw - X / Twitter: https://twitter.com/Indialawmumbai - Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/indialawllp/ - Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/indialawllp ---