Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881–Sec. 138–Indian Partnership Act, 1932–Sec. 63–Discharge by the High Court on the ground that the respondent-accused had resignated from the partner of firm–Justification–Provisions of Sec. 63 were not complied with after the resignation–Simply because the cheques were signed by accused no. 2 who was the authorized signatory of the partnership firm does not discharge the liability of respondent–Categorical averments that the respondent was involved in day-to-day affairs of the partnership firm–Further, allegation that the accused no. 3 and respondent-accused no. 4 had stated that they would ensure that the money is repaid–High Court has erred in law by exceeding its jurisdiction while exercising its powers u/s. 482.
