Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI Crl.M.C. No.2586/2007 Reserved on 8th September 2009 Date of decision: 22nd September, 2009 Nitin Meshram ....Petitioner through: Anand, Adv. & Mr. Rajshree N. Reddy, Adv. VERSUS Softmart Solutions ....Respondent
through: Vivek Sood, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL
1.Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? Yes
2.To be referred to the Reporter or not? Yes
3.Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes GITA MITTAL, J
1. The present case raises a fundamental issue with regard to necessary averments to invite vicarious liability of persons concerned with the affairs of the company by virtue of Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for commission of an offence under Section 138 thereof in relation to dishonouring of a cheque, the primary liability for which falls on the drawer company.
2. The petitioner has sought quashing of the proceedings arising -1- out of Complaint Case No.1718/1/03 filed by the respondent for commission of such offences, on the ground that there is no averment in the complaint as to how or in what manner the petitioner was responsible for the conduct of the business of the company or otherwise responsible in regard to its functioning. It is submitted that the petitioner has not issued any cheque and the averments in the complaint taken in their entirety do not disclose commission of any offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 by the petitioner.
3. The respondent filed a complaint under Sections 138 to 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code against the Digitech Solutions Limited;
Shri Anoop Sareen; Shri Rajiv Goel and Shri Nitin Mishra-its directors and one Darshan-its accountant on the allegations that they approached and transacted with the respondent-complainant for the purchase of computer software items and that in partial discharge of liability, issued four cheques being Cheque nos.705515, 705516, 705517 & 705518 which were dishonoured on presentation due to insufficiency of funds in the bank account of the company.
Proceedings against the accountant were not pressed.
4. In support of the contention noticed hereinabove, reliance is -2- placed on several pronouncements of the Apex Court reported at 2005 SCC (Crl.) 1975 SMS Pharmaceutical Limited Vs. Neeta Bhalla & Anr.; (2007) 3 SCC 693 Saroj Kumar Poddar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi & Anr.); (2006) 10 SCC 581 Sabitha Ramamurthy & Anr. Vs. RBS Channabasavaradhya; (2008) 8 SCC 278 Green Earth Asphalt & Power Private Limited Vs. State of Maharashtra through PSO & Ors. & (2009) 9 SCALE 455 Jugesh Sehgal Vs. Shamsher Singh Jogi.
5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the submissions made by the petitioner. It is contended that the complaint was filed in the year 2003 and the petitioner has waited to raise this challenge in the year 2007. It is urged that the matter is at the stage of evidence and no interference is called for at this stage. It is further urged that the respondent-complainant has placed reliance not on Section 138 alone but the complaint contains substantive allegations inviting the applicability of Section 141(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The submission is that the pronouncements relied upon by the petitioner do not deal with the necessary averments and ingredients laid down under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Learned counsel has urged at length that -3- the expression "consent", "connivance" and "neglect" as appear in Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, have not been explained by the legislature and have to derive their meaning from the meaning given to them in common parlance. My attention is drawn to the meaning of this expression given in the Legal Glossary issued by the Government. In support of this contention, reliance is placed on the pronouncements of the Apex Court reported at 2007 (4) JCC (NI) 364 Ramji Lal Vs. Amit Ved & 2007 (4) JCC 3083 Krishana Dwivedi Vs. Surender Kumar. It
6. I have heard learned counsels at great length. In order to appreciate the submissions which have been made before this court, it becomes necessary to notice the relevant provisions of Sections 138 & 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 which read thus:-
138. Dishonour of cheque for insufficiency, etc. of funds in the account:- Where any cheque drawn by a person on an account maintained by him with a banker for payment of any amount of money to another person from out of that account for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability, is returned by the bank unpaid, either because of the amount of money standing to the credit of that account is insufficient to honour the cheque or that it exceeds the amount arranged to be paid from that account by an agreement made with that bank, such person shall be deemed to have committed an offence and shall, without prejudice to any other provision of this Act, be punished with imprisonment for (a term which -4- may be extended to two years) or with fine which may extend to twice the amount of the cheque, or with both:
Provided that nothing contained in this section shall apply unless-
(a) the cheque has been presented to the bank within a period of six months from the date on which it is drawn or within the period of its validity, whichever is earlier;
(b) the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque, as the case may be, makes a demand for the payment of the said amount of money by giving a notice in writing, to the drawer of the cheque (within thirty days) of the receipt of information by him from the bank regarding the return of the cheque as unpaid; and
(c) the drawer of such cheque fails to make the payment of the said amount of money to the payee or as the case may be, to the holder in due course of the cheque within fifteen days of the receipt of the said notice.
141. Offences by companies:-
(1) If the person committing an offence under Section 138 is a company, every person who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly:
Provided that nothing contained in this sub-section shall render any person liable to punishment if he proves that the offence was committed without his knowledge, or that he had exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence:
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section -5- (1), where any offence under this Act has been committed by a company and it is proved that the offence has been committed with the consent or connivance of, or is attributable to, any neglect on the part of, any director, manager, secretary or other officer of the company, such director, manager, secretary or other officer shall also be deemed to be guilty of that offence and shall be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly."
7. In view of the primary submissions on behalf of the petitioner noted hereinabove, it also becomes necessary to notice some of the material averments in the complaint which read as follows:-
"1. That the complainant, a Partnership Firm is engaged in the business of Computer Software. The accused no.1 through accused nos.2 to 5 approached and transacted with the Complainant for the purchase of the following Computer Software items:-
S.No Inv.No./Date Description of Software Qty. Amount
1. DO3-1256 MS WINDOWS 2000 SERVER 3 96,720.00
11-03-2003 (5USER) CD
MS OFFICE XP PROF. OEM 2 29,120.00
AUTODESK AUTOCAD 2002 1 1,12,320.00
SYMANTEC NAV 2003 SYMANTEC 5 7,280.00
ANTIVIRUS MULTI-TIER
PROTECTION (5 USER) 2 14,040.00
MS WINDOWS 2000 PROF OEM CD 9 63,882.00
2. DO3-1264 AUTODESK AUTOCAD 2002 1 1,12,320.00
13-03-2003 SYMANTEC NAV 2003 15 21,840.00
3. DO3-1323 MS PROJECT 2002 SERVER (5 USER) 1 63,440.00
27-03-2003 MS PROJECT 2002 1 25,324.00
4. DO3-1353 MS WINDOWS 2000 CAL MOLP NL 10 13,000.00
-6-
S.No Inv.No./Date Description of Software Qty. Amount
3-03-2003 MS PROJECT 2002 SERVER CAL 5 29,068.00
MOLP NL
2. That in partial discharge of liability, the accused persons issued the following cheques to the complainant:-
Ch. No. Dated Bank Amount 705515 30-04-03 Syndicate Bank 1,20,000.00 st C-34, 1 Floor, Defence Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi -<PHONE_NUMBER>16 06-05-03 Syndicate Bank 1,20,000.00 st C-34, 1 Floor, Defence Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi -<PHONE_NUMBER>17 06-05-03 Syndicate Bank 1,20,000.00 st C-34, 1 Floor, Defence Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi -<PHONE_NUMBER>18 06-05-03 Syndicate Bank 1,26,283.00 st C-34, 1 Floor, Defence Colony, Lajpat Nagar, New Delhi - 110 024
3. That on the presentation of the aforesaid cheques, the same were returned as dishonoured due to insufficiency of funds in the Bank account of accused no.1. The said cheques were presented on several occasions, on each of which they were returned as dishonoured for insufficiency of funds in the Bank account of accused no.1. The intimation of dishonour was received by complainant on/around 20th July, 2003. It is apparent from their conduct that they never had the intentions of making payment to the complainant for the purchase of the aforesaid software. The accused nos.2 to 5 have fraudulently induced the complainant to supply the aforesaid software, without the intention of making payment, thereby leading to financial losses to the -7- complainant. This act of commission and omission also amount to cheating for which the accused persons are liable to be punished under Section 420 I.P.C.
4. That the legal notice dated 17.08.2003 was sent on 18.08.2003 on behalf of the complainant to the accused persons vide which the accused were asked to make the payment of the amount of the said cheques with interest @ 15% per annum within 15 days of the said legal notice. The legal notice was sent by the complainant by Regd. A.D. Post, Speed Post and through U.P.C. And the same have been received by the accused persons.
5. That however the accused persons have not made any payment towards the said cheques, to the complainant within the statutory period of 15 days from the legal notice or even till date, and therefore the accused persons have committed the offence of dishonour of cheques under Sections 138-142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and hence are liable for punishment for the said offence.
6. That accused nos.2 to 5 are the principal officers of the accused no.1. The accused nos.2 to 5 are in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the accused no.1. The accused nos.2 to 5 with the consent and connivance of each other have committed the aforesaid offence. They have actively participated in the transaction with the complainant in their capacity as principal officers.
7. That the cause of action for filing the instant complaint arose when the said cheques were dishonoured and when the payment was not made to the complainant within the stipulated period of 15 days from the receipt of the legal notice by the accused persons."
8. The issue which has been raised before this court has arisen for consideration in the several judgments noticed hereinabove.
-8-Each time, the expressions used in the complaint varied slightly.
The same can be usefully considered as to facilitate examination of the issue as to what would constitute adequate pleadings in a complaint to impose vicarious liability upon a person who was either a director or a person controlling the affairs of the company.
9. The exposition of law by the Supreme Court in 2005 SCC (Crl.) 1975 SMS Pharmaceutical Limited Vs. Neeta Bhalla & Anr. sets out the applicable principles succinctly and can be usefully adverted to. They read as follows:-
"4. In the present case, we are concerned with criminal liability on account of dishonour of cheque. It primarily falls on the drawer company and is extended to officers of the Company. The normal rule in the cases involving criminal liability is against vicarious liability, that is, no one is to be held criminally liable for an act of another. This normal rule is, however, subject to exception on account of specific provision being made in statutes extending liability to others. Section 141 of the Act is an instance of specific provision which in case an offence under Section 138 is committed by a Company, extends criminal liability for dishonour of cheque to officers of the Company. Section 141 contains conditions which have to be satisfied before the liability can be extended to officers of a company. Since the provision creates criminal liability, the conditions have to be strictly complied with. The conditions are intended to ensure that a person who is sought to be made vicariously liable for an offence of which the principal accused is the Company, had a role to play in relation to the incriminating act and further that such a person should know what is attributed to him to make him -9- liable. In other words, persons who had nothing to do with the matter need not be roped in. A company being a juristic person, all its deeds and functions are result of acts of others. Therefore, officers of a Company who are responsible for acts done in the name of the Company are sought to be made personally liable for acts which result in criminal action being taken against the Company. It makes every person who. at the time the offence was committed, was incharge of and was responsible to the Company for the conduct of business of the Company, the Company, liable for the offence. The proviso to the sub-section contains an escape route for persons who are able to prove that the offence was committed without their knowledge or that they had exercised all due diligence to prevent commission of the offence.
xxx xxx xxx
10. While analysing Section 141 of the Act, it will be seen that it operates in cases where an offence under Section 138 is committed by a company. The key words which occur in the Section are "every person". These are general words and take every person connected with a company within their sweep. Therefore, these words have been rightly qualified by use of the words " who, at the time the offence was committed, was in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, as well as the company, shall be deemed to be guilty of the offence etc."
What is required is that the persons who are sought to be made criminally liable under Section 141 should be at the time the offence was committed, in charge of and responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company. Every person connected with the company shall not fall within the ambit of the provision. It is only those persons who were in charge of and responsible for conduct of business of the company at the time of
- 10 -
commission of an offence, who will be liable for criminal action. It follows from this that if a director of a Company who was not in charge of and was not responsible for the conduct of the business of the company at the relevant time, will not be liable under the provision. The liability arises from being in charge of and responsible for conduct of business of the company at the relevant time when the offence was committed and not on the basis of merely holding a designation or office in a company. Conversely, a person not holding any office or designation in a Company may be liable if he satisfies the main requirement of being in charge of and responsible for conduct of business of a Company at the relevant time. Liability depends on the role one plays in the affairs of a Company and not on designation or status. If being a Director or Manager or Secretary was enough to cast criminal liability, the Section would have said so. Instead of "every person" the section would have said "every Director, Manager or Secretary in a Company is liable"....etc. The legislature is aware that it is a case of criminal liability which means serious consequences so far as the person sought to be made liable is concerned. Therefore, only persons who can be said to be connected with the commission of a crime at the relevant time have been subjected to action.
18. To sum up, there is almost unanimous judicial opinion that necessary averments ought to be contained in a complaint before a persons can be subjected to criminal process. A liability under Section 141 of the Act is sought to be fastened vicariously on a person connected with a Company, the principal accused being the company itself. It is a departure from the rule in criminal law against vicarious liability. A clear case should be spelt out in the complaint against the person sought to be made liable. Section 141 of the Act contains the requirements for making a person liable under the said provision. That respondent tallies within
- 11 -
parameters of Section 141 has to be spelled out. A complaint has to be examined by the Magistrate in the first instance on the basis of averments contained therein. If the Magistrate is satisfied that there are averments which bring the case within Section 141 he would issue the process. We have seen that merely being described as a director in a company is not sufficient to satisfy the requirement of Section 141. Even a non director can be liable under Section 141 of the Act. The averments in the complaint would also serve the purpose that the person sought to be made liable would know what is the case which is alleged against him. This will enable him to meet the case at the trial.
19. In view of the above discussion, our answers to the questions posed in the Reference are as under:
(a) It is necessary to specifically aver in a complaint under Section 141 that at the time the offence was committed, the person accused was in charge of, and responsible for the conduct of business of the company. This averment is an essential requirement of Section 141 and has to be made in a complaint. Without this averment being made in a complaint, the requirements of Section 141 cannot be said to be satisfied.
(b) The answer to question posed in sub-para (b) has to be in negative. Merely being a director of a company is not sufficient to make the person liable under Section 141 of the Act. A director in a company cannot be deemed to be in charge of and responsible to the company for conduct of its business. The requirement of Section 141 is that the person sought to be made liable should be in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the business of the company at the relevant time. This has to be averred as a fact as there is no deemed liability of a director in such cases.
(c) The answer to question (c ) has to be in affirmative. The question notes that the Managing Director or Joint Managing Director would be admittedly in charge of the company and responsible
- 12 -
to the company for conduct of its business. When that is so, holders of such positions in a company become liable under Section 141 of the Act. By virtue of the office they hold as Managing Director or Joint Managing Director, these persons are in charge of and responsible for the conduct of business of the company. Therefore, they get covered under Section
141. So far as signatory of a cheque which is dishonoured is concerned, he is clearly responsible for the incriminating act and will be covered under Sub-section (2) of Section 141."
10. In (2006) 10 SCC 581 Sabitha Ramamurthy & Anr. Vs. RBS Channabasavaradhya this issue was considered in the light of the complaint and supporting deposition. It was held as follows:
"3. In support of the said complaint petition, one Ravidraradya, son of the complainant filed a sworn affidavit stating:
...The accused No. 2 is the M.D. and others are Chairman and partners. The accused- company towards repayment of the loan, issued a cheque in favour of the complainant. The M.D. signed and issued the cheque dated 23.6.2001 for Rs. 1,24,406/- on the account maintained by the company. On presentation of the said cheque to the Bank for collection, the same was returned on 30.6.2001 as insufficient funds. Notice dated 12.7.2001 was issued through Advocate to the accused was served on 13.7.2001. The case was filed on 27.8.2001....
Processes were directed to be issued on the said statement for alleged commission of an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
- 13 -
xxx xxx xxx
7. A bare perusal of the complaint petitions demonstrates that the statutory requirements contained in Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act had not been complied with. It may be true that it is not necessary for the complainant to specifically reproduce the wordings of the section but what is required is a clear statement of fact so as to enable the court to arrive at a prima facie opinion that the accused are vicariously liable.
Section 141 raises a legal fiction. By reason of the said provision, a person although is not personally liable for commission of such an offence would be vicariously liable therefore. Such vicarious liability can be inferred so far as a company registered or incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 is concerned only if the requisite statements, which are required to be averred in the complaint petition, are made so as to make the accused therein vicariously liable for the offence committed by the company. Before a person can be made vicariously liable, strict compliance of the statutory requirements would be insisted. Not only the averments made in paragraph 7 of the complaint petitions does not meet the said statutory requirements, the sworn statement of the witness made by the son of Respondent herein, does not contain any statement that Appellants were in charge of the business of the company. In a case where the court is required to issue summons which would put the accused to some sort of harassment, the court should insist on strict compliance of the statutory requirements. In terms of Section 200 of the Code of Criminal procedure, the complainant is bound to make statements on oath as to how the offence has been committed and how the accused persons are responsible therefore. In the event, ultimately, the prosecution is found to be frivolous or otherwise mala fide, the court may direct registration of case against the complainant for mala fide prosecution of the accused. The accused would
- 14 -
also be entitled to file a suit for damages. The relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure are required to be construed from the aforementioned point of view."
(underlined supplied)
11. The Apex Court had occasion to consider this issue again in the pronouncement reported at (2007) 3 SCC 693 Saroj Kumar Poddar Vs. State (NCT of Delhi & Anr.). On a consideration of the averments made in the complaint laid before the court, the principles laid in the earlier pronouncements were reiterated and it was held thus:-
"12. A person would be vicariously liable for commission of an offence on the part of a Company only in the event the conditions precedent laid down therefore in Section 141 of the Act stand satisfied. For the aforementioned purpose, a strict construction would be necessary.
13. The purported averments which have been made in the complaint so as to make the appellant vicariously liable for the offence committed by the Company read as under:
"That the accused No. 1 is a public limited company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and the accused 2 to 8 are/ were its Directors at the relevant time and the said company is managed by the Board of Directors and they are responsible for the incharge of the conduct and business of the company - Accused No. 1. However, cheques referred to in the complaint have been
- 15 -
signed by the Accused No. 3 & 8 i.e. Shri K.K. Pilania and Shri N.K. Munjal for and on behalf of the Accused Company No. 1."
14. Apart from the Company and the appellant, as noticed hereinbefore, the Managing Director and all other Directors were also made accused. The appellant did not issue any cheque. He, as noticed hereinbefore, had resigned from the Directorship of the Company. It may be true that as to exactly on what date the said resignation was accepted by the Company is not known, but, even otherwise, there is no averment in the complaint petitions as to how and in what manner the appellant was responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company or otherwise responsible to it in regard to its functioning. He had not issued any cheque. How he is responsible for dishonour of the cheque has not been stated. The allegations made in paragraph 3, thus, in our opinion do not satisfy the requirements of Section 141 of the Act."
12. So far as the averments made in the complaint which was considered by the Apex Court in Sabita Ramamurthy vs. R.B.S.
Chhanawasvaradhya (2006) 10 SCC 581 are concerned, the complainant had merely stated that the accused being the company, all directors were responsible for the clearance of the liability under section 141 of the Act and their acts and deeds were punishable under section 138 of the Act. In this background, it was held by the Apex Court that vicarious liability under section 141 of the Act could be inferred only if the requisite statements which are required to be averred in the complaint petition are made so as to
- 16 -
make the accused person vicariously liable for the offence committed by the company.
13. In (2008) 8 SCC 278 Green Earth Asphalt and Power Pvt.
Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors, the high court had quashed proceedings even against the respondent no. 2 firm and the authorised signatory of the firm in which he had signed the cheque. It was in this background held those partners which were in charge of the affairs of the firm and responsible to it could be proceeded against under section 141.
14. In (2009) 9 SCALE 455 Yugesh Sehgal vs. Shamsher Singh Yoji, the complainant had filed a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instrumetns Act, 1881 against four accused persons. Para 3 of the complaint clearly stated that the cheque in question was issued from an account which was non-existent on the date when it was issued or that the account from where the cheque was issued pertained to someone else. Since, as per the complainant's own pleadings, the bank account from where the cheque had been issued was not held in the name of the appellant who was seeking quashing of proceedings under section 482 of CrPC in this case, it was held that one of the requisite ingredients of section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was not satisfied and,
- 17 -
therefore, continuance of the further proceedings in the complaint against appellant/accused under section 138 of the NI act would be an abuse of process of court. The Apex Court thus set aside the order of the high court declared such a case to be a fit case wherein the high court should exercise jurisdiction under section 482 of CrPC.
15. A recent pronouncement of the Apex Court reported at 2009 (9) SCALE 87 K.K. Ahuja Vs. V.K. Vohra and Anr. is relevant on the issues raised. On a consideration of the entire law laid down by the Apex Court has laid down the applicable principles thus:-
8. In Saroj Kumar Poddar v. State (NCT of Delhi) MANU/SC/0711/2007 : 2007CriLJ1419 , while dealing with an appeal against the refusal to quash the order taking cognizance, by an Ex-Director who had resigned from the Board prior to the date of issuance of the cheque, this Court held that making some bald averment was not sufficient. In that case, the complaint contained the following averments:
"That Accused 1 is a public limited company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and Accused 2 to 8 are/were its Directors at the relevant time and the said Company is managed by the Board of Directors and they are responsible for and in charge of the conduct and business of the Company, Accused 1. However, cheques referred to in the complaint have been signed by Accused 3 and 8 for and on behalf of Accused 1 Company."
In spite of the averment that accused were Directors at the relevant time and were responsible for and in
- 18 -
charge of the conduct of the business of the company, this Court held that allegations in the complaint, even if taken to be correct in their entirety, did not disclose any offence by the appellant, on the following reasoning:
"Apart from the Company and the appellant, as noticed hereinbefore, the Managing Director and all other Directors were also made accused. The appellant did not issue any cheque. He, as noticed hereinbefore, had resigned from the Directorship of the Company. It may be true that as to exactly on what date the said resignation was accepted by the Company is not known, but, even otherwise, there is no averment in the complaint petitions as to how and in what manner the appellant was responsible for the conduct of the business of the Company or otherwise responsible to it in regard to its functioning. He had not issued any cheque. How he is responsible for dishonour of the cheque has not been stated. The allegations made in paragraph 3, thus, in our opinion do not satisfy the requirements of Section 141 of the Act.
(emphasis supplied)
9. In two subsequent decisions - SMS Pharmaceuticals v. Neeta Bhalla MANU/SC/7125/2007 : (2007)4SCC70 [for short 'SMS Pharma (II)'] and Everest Advertising (P) Ltd. v. State, Govt. of NCT of Delhi MANU/SC/1767/2007 : 2007CriLJ2442 , relating to complaints against Directors of a company, the very same two-Judge Bench which decided Saroj Kumar Poddar, clarified that the observations therein that `the complaint should contain averments as to how and in what manner the accused was responsible for the conduct of the business of the company, or otherwise responsible for its functioning' were with reference to the particular facts of that case and should not be considered as a general proposition of
- 19 -
law. But latter decisions dealing with liability of directors - N.K. Wahi v. Shekhar Singh MANU/SC/1198/2007 : AIR2007SC1454 , DCM Financial Services Ltd. v. J. N. Sareen MANU/SC/7699/2008 : 2008CriLJ3178 , and Ramraj Singh v. State of MP (a decision of a Bench of three Judges) MANU/SC/0593/2009 : 2009(5)SCALE670 , have reiterated the principle laid down in Saroj Kumar Poddar. The prevailing trend appears to require the complainant to state how a Director who is sought to be made an accused, was in charge of the business of the company, as every director need not be and is not in charge of the business of the company. If that is the position in regard to a director, it is needless to emphasise that in the case of non-director officers, there is all the more the need to state what his part is with regard to conduct of business of the company and how and in what manner he is liable.
xxx xxx xxx
11. The criminal liability for the offence by a company under Section 138, is fastened vicariously on the persons referred to in Sub-section (1) of Section 141 by virtue of a legal fiction. Penal statutes are to be construed strictly. Penal statutes providing constructive vicarious liability should be construed much more strictly. When conditions are prescribed for extending such constructive criminal liability to others, courts will insist upon strict literal compliance. There is no question of inferential or implied compliance. Therefore, a specific averment complying with the requirements of Section 141 is imperative. As pointed out in K. Srikanth Singh v. North East Securities Ltd. 2007 (12) SCC 788, the mere fact that at some point of time, an officer of a company had played some role in the financial affairs of the company, will not be sufficient to attract the constructive liability under Section 141 of the Act.
12. Sub-section (2) of Section 141 provides that a
- 20 -
Director, Manager, Secretary or other officer, though not in charge of the conduct of the business of the company will be liable if the offence had been committed with his consent or connivance or if the offence was a result of any negligence on his part. The liability of persons mentioned in Sub-section (2) is not on account of any legal fiction but on account of the specific part played - consent and connivance or negligence. If a person is to be made liable under Sub- section (2) of Section 141, then it is necessary to aver consent and connivance, or negligence on his part.
14. The words "every person who, at the time of the offence was committed, was in charge of, and was responsible for the conduct of the business of the company" occurs not only in Section 141(1) of the Act but in several enactments dealing with offences by companies, to mention a few - Section 278B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 22C of Minimum Wages Act, 1948, Section 86A of the Employees State Insurance Act, 1948, Section 14A of Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, Section 29 of Payment of Bonus Act, 1965, Section 40 of The Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 and Section 47 of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974. But neither Section 141(1) of the Act, nor the pari materia provisions in other enactments give any indication as to who are the persons responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company. Therefore, we will have to fall back upon the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 which is the law relating to and regulating companies. Section 291 of the said Act provides that subject to the provisions of that Act, the Board of Directors of a company shall be entitled to exercise all such powers, and to do all such acts and things, as the company is authorised to exercise and do. A company though a legal entity can act only through its Board of Directors. The settled position is that a Managing Director is prima facie in charge of and responsible for the company's business and affairs and can be prosecuted for offences by the company.
- 21 -
But insofar as other directors are concerned, they can be prosecuted only if they were in charge of and responsible for the conduct of the company's business. A combined reading of Sections 5 and 291 of Companies Act, 1956 with the definitions in clauses (24), (26), (30), (31), (45) of Section 2 of that Act would show that the following persons are considered to be the persons who are responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company :
(a) the managing director/s;
(b) the whole-time director/s;
(c) the manager;
(d) the secretary;
(e) any person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the Board of directors of the company is accustomed to act;
(f) any person charged by the Board with the responsibility of complying with that provision (and who has given his consent in that behalf to the Board); and
(g) where any company does not have any of the officers specified in clauses (a) to (c), any director or directors who may be specified by the Board in this behalf or where no director is so specified, all the directors.
It follows that other employees of the company, cannot be said to be persons who are responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company.
15. Section 141 uses the words "was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company". It is evident that a person who can be made vicariously liable under Sub-section (1) of Section 141 is a person who is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company and in addition is also in charge of the business of the company. There may be many directors and secretaries who are not in charge of the
- 22 -
business of the company at all. The meaning of the words "person in charge of the business of the company" was considered by this Court in Girdhari Lal Gupta v. D.N. Mehta MANU/SC/0487/1971 :
[1971]3SCR748 followed in State of Karnataka v. Pratap Chand MANU/SC/0237/1981 : 1981CriLJ595 and Katta Sujatha v. Fertiliser & Chemicals Travancore Ltd. MANU/SC/0897/2002 : (2002)7SCC655 . This Court held that the words refer to a person who is in overall control of the day to day business of the company. This Court pointed out that a person may be a director and thus belongs to the group of persons making the policy followed by the company, but yet may not be in charge of the business of the company; that a person may be a Manager who is in charge of the business but may not be in overall charge of the business; and that a person may be an officer who may be in charge of only some part of the business.
16. Therefore, if a person does not meet the first requirement, that is being a person who is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, neither the question of his meeting the second requirement (being a person in charge of the business of the company), nor the question of such person being liable under Sub-section (1) of Section 141 does not arise. To put it differently, to be vicariously liable under Sub-section (1) of Section 141, a person should fulfill the 'legal requirement' of being a person in law (under the statute governing companies) responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company and also fulfill the 'factual requirement' of being a person in charge of the business of the company.
17. Therefore, the averment in a complaint that an accused is a director and that he is in charge of and is responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company, duly affirmed in the sworn statement, may be sufficient for the purpose of issuing summons to him. But if the accused is not one of the persons who falls under the category of 'persons who are responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company' (listed in para 14 above),
- 23 -
then merely by stating that 'he was in charge of the business of the company' or by stating that 'he was in charge of the day to day management of the company' or by stating that he was in charge of, and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company', he cannot be made vicariously liable under Section 141(1) of the Act.
18. It should, however, be kept in view that even an officer who was not in charge of and was responsible to the company for the conduct of the business of the company can be made liable under Sub-section (2) of Section 141. For making a person liable under Section 141(2), the mechanical repetition of the requirements under Section 141(1) will be of no assistance, but there should be necessary averments in the complaint as to how and in what manner the accused was guilty of consent and connivance or negligence and therefore, responsible under Sub-section (2) of Section 141 of the Act.
19. Another aspect that requires to be noticed is that only a Director, Manager, Secretary or other officer can be made liable under Sub-section (2) of Section 141. But under Sub-section (1) of Section 141, it is theoretically possible to make even a person who is not a director or officer, liable, as for example, a person falling under category (e) and (f) of Section 5 of Companies Act, 1956. When in SMS Pharma (I), this Court observed that 'conversely, a person not holding any office or designation in a company may be liable if he satisfies the requirement of being in charge of and responsible for conduct of the business of the company', this Court obviously had in mind, persons described in clauses (e) and (f) of Section 5 of Companies Act. Be that as it may.
20. The position under Section 141 of the Act can be summarized thus :
(i) xxx xxx xxx (ii) xxx xxx xxx - 24 -
(iii) In the case of a Director, Secretary or Manager (as defined in Section 2(24) of the Companies Act) or a person referred to in clauses (e) and (f) of Section 5 of Companies Act, an averment in the complaint that he was in charge of, and was responsible to the company, for the conduct of the business of the company is necessary to bring the case under Section 141(1). No further averment would be necessary in the complaint, though some particulars will be desirable. They can also be made liable under Section 141(2) by making necessary averments relating to consent and connivance or negligence, in the complaint, to bring the matter under that Sub-section.
(iv) Other Officers of a company can not be made liable under Sub-section (1) of Section 141. Other officers of a company can be made liable only under Sub-section (2) of Section 141, be averring in the complaint their position and duties in the company and their role in regard to the issue and dishonour of the cheque, disclosing consent, connivance or negligence.
(Underlining supplied)
16. So far as the expressions "neglect", "consent" and "connivance" are concerned, the same have been described in the legal glossary of the Government of India thus:
"Neglect: to disregard; to pay little or no attention to; to fail to perform, render, discharge (a duty) to take (a precaution).
Consent: a concurrence of will Connivance: passive consent; a corrupt or guilt assent to wrong doing not involving actual participation in it, but implying knowledge of and failure to prevent or oppose it"
These meanings would guide the consideration of the acts and
- 25 -
omissions attributed to the petitioner under sub-section 2 of Section 141 of the statute.
17. Before this court, the respondent has not only described the petitioner as a director of the company but the complaint makes a specific allegation that the petitioner along with the other accused persons approached and transacted with the complainant for the purchase of software items; the accused persons (which included the petitioner arrayed as accused person no.4 in the complaint) issued cheques to the complainant; that the accused persons never had any intention of making payment to the complainant for the purchase of the software; the accused nos.2 to 5 (including the present petitioner) have fraudulently induced the complainant to supply software without the intention of making payment, thereby leading to financial loss to the complainant; the legal notice dated 17th August, 2003 was sent on 18th August, 2003 on behalf of the complainant to all the accused persons which asked them to make payment of the amount of cheque. Despite receipt of the legal notice, the accused persons (including the petitioner), have not made any payment towards the amount of the cheques to the complainant within fifteen days from the receipt of the legal notice and consequently have committed the offence of dishonour of
- 26 -
cheques under Section 138/141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. It has been specifically averred in para 6 of the complaint that the petitioner as well as the other accused are principal officers of the accused company and are responsible for the conduct of its business. It is urged that the accused persons have with the consent and connivance of one another, committed the said offences. In para 6 noticed hereinabove, the respondent has made a specific averment that accused nos.2 to 5 have actively participated in the transaction with the complainant in their capacity as principal officers of the company.
So far as the cause of action for filing the complaint is concerned, in para 7 of the complaint, the complainant has stated that the cause of action arose when the cheques were dishonoured and on the failure to make the payment to the complainant within the stipulated period of 15 days from the receipt of the legal notice by the accused person.
18. From the above it appears that the respondent-complainant has not merely reproduced the words of the statute merely but has actually attributed certain acts of commission and omission against the petitioner. Apart from the averment that the petitioner is a director, it has been specifically averred that the petitioner
- 27 -
negotiated and participated in the dealings and transactions with the complainant. It has also been contended that despite the service of the legal notice upon the petitioner, the petitioner has failed to make payment of the same. In addition to the above, it has been urged that the offence alleged by the company has been committed with the consent and connivance of the accused nos.2 to 5 with one another. No reply was even sent by the petitioner to the legal notice.
19. It needs no elaboration that while testing the maintainability of a complaint on the ground that it fails to disclose any commission of offence or the order of summoning by the trial court, it is trite that the complaint has to be examined and the averments made therein have to be taken as true at their face value.
20. The pleas taken up by the petitioner are undoubtedly in the nature of defence which could be urged before the trial court.
However on a consideration of the allegations made in the complaint taken at the face value as noted hereinabove, the complaint filed by the petitioner is one in which the necessary averments attracting the applicability of section 138 and 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are made out.
The present case challenges a summoning order. In view of
- 28 -
the principles laid down in para 17 of K.K. Ahuja Vs. V.K. Vora & Anr. (supra), the challenge in the instant case is misconceived.
21. Yet another submission urged on behalf of the petitioner deserves to be considered. It is contended that the respondent has arrived at a settlement and in this behalf on 7th October, 2005, an amount of Rs.1 lakh has been received before the trial court by way of a demand draft. Learned counsel for the respondent/complainant has explained that a settlement was being explored with Sh. Anoop Sareen and Shri Rajeev Goel who were arrayed as accused person nos. 2 and 3. No settlement was ever contemplated or negotiated with the present petitioner. No payment has been made or received from the petitioner. No details of any settlement have also been placed on record. In this background, settlement, if any, with any of the other accused persons would not assist the petitioner in any manner.
22. So far as a settlement is concerned, the legal principles which govern the same have been succinctly stated by this court in the pronouncement reported at 106 (2003) DLT 708 Jindal Aromatic vs. South Spices Exports Pvt. Ltd. in the following terms :-
"23. The legal position which emerges from the aforesaid judgment is that an accord discharges the performance of obligations under the contract. A dispute pertaining to satisfaction furnishes a fresh
- 29 -
and independent cause of action, until and unless it is provided that the performance of the satisfaction was a condition precedent for discharge under the contract. If promise is received in satisfaction, it is a good satisfaction, but if the performance and not the promise is intended to operate in satisfaction, then there will be no satisfaction without performance. Wherever there is an accord, obligations under the original contract would be discharged until and unless it is specifically provided that the performance of the satisfaction would discharge the obligations under the contract."
23. The plea of a petitioner that the respondent-complainant had arrived at a settlement and received payment of amounts as well pursuant thereto meriting quashing of the criminal complaint therefore is contrary to the well settled principle on this issue.
Apart from the fact that whether an accord having been arrived at between the parties would amount to discharge of performance of obligations under the contract between them and whether the same could discharge the criminal liability for commission of an offence under the Negotiable Instruments Act is a separate issue. The question which requires to be considered is as to whether there was any settlement of the original cause based whereon the complaint was filed. In the instant case, there is nothing on record to show that the parties had arrived at any settlement or the terms of accord if any, between the parties.
From the above, it is also evident that a mere plea of a
- 30 -
settlement would not ipso facto lead to a conclusion that the original cause is therefore brought to an end. The accord or the terms of the settlement have to be placed and examined. The intent of the parties is required to be determined from a scrutiny thereof. It has to be ascertained as to whether the parties intended the accord by itself to bring the disputes to an end or the satisfaction of the terms thereof which would do so.
24. In the instant case no accord or terms or conditions of any settlement have been placed on record. There is nothing on record to show discharge of even the civil liability by any accord or terms or conditions thereof. In this background, the submission that there was a settlement which could defeat the maintainability of the criminal proceedings is factually baseless and devoid of legal merit.
25. In support of the plea that the present petition is highly belated, learned counsel for the respondent has drawn my attention to the pronouncement of this court reported at 2007 (4) JCC (NI) 364 Ramji Lal vs. Anant Yadav (since expired) in this case, the court had refused to exercise inherent powers under section 482 of the CrPC for quashing of a complaint case which was pending for trial for more than five years holding that the petition for quashing was an abuse of the process of law which was dismissed with costs.
- 31 -
26. Again in 2007 (4) JCC 3083 Krishna Dvivedi vs. Sunder Kr., this court held that the plea taken in the petition for quashing of the criminal complaint was really in the nature of the defence of the petitioner which he could take during the trial and that this court was not the forum to conduct the trial between the parties. It was also observed that the order of summoning was passed more than two years before the challenge thereto and that there was no explanation for the delay. In these circumstances, again the petition under section 482 of the CrPC seeking quashing of the prosecution was allowed.
27. Before this court, the matter has been pending before the trial court since 2003 and a challenge has been laid to the proceedings only in 2007. There is no explanation at all for the delay which has ensued.
28. The last submission on behalf of the petitioner was that he has been wrongly described as Nitin Meshram in the complaint whereas his correct name is Nitin Mishra. So far as this submission is concerned, it is noteworthy that in addition to the name, the complaint has indicated that the petitioner arrayed as respondent no.5 was the director of the firm. The petitioner has rightly understood that the reference was to him and has made no
- 32 -
objection after he was summoned to stand trial in the case. The petitioner accepted the summons as described in the complaint and applied for bail. No dispute as to identity has been raised at any time before the trial court where the complaint has remained pending since 2003.
29. In view of the above discussion, it is held that in the instant case, the complaint does not deserve to be rejected at the outset and the complainant is required to be given an opportunity to establish its case.
For all these reasons this petition is dismissed with costs which are quantified at Rs.20,000/-.
30. It is made clear that nothing herein contained is an expression of opinion on the merits of the allegations in the complaint.
September 22, 2009 Gita Mittal, J. aa - 33 -


CodeMirror
CodeMirror is a versatile text editor implemented in JavaScript for the browser. It is specialized for editing code, and comes with over 100 language modes and various addons that implement more advanced editing functionality.
A rich programming API and a CSS theming system are available for customizing CodeMirror to fit your application, and extending it with new functionality.
You can find more information (and the manual) on the project page. For questions and discussion, use the discussion forum.
See CONTRIBUTING.md for contributing guidelines.
The CodeMirror community aims to be welcoming to everybody. We use the Contributor Covenant (1.1) as our code of conduct.


Every Snackbar needs a place to be attached to the dom. The easiest way to achieve this is a dialog-outlet html element within your body element:
... ...


Sri Manakula Vinayagar Engineering College
powered by Google Developers
At DSC SMVEC, we maintain a separate portal for recruitment and other team related stuffs. Here authorized team members can login and do stuffs that mean a lot to our community.
Know to draw and design images? and had experience in making colorfull posters? then you are the one, join us in the graphic designing department.
know to capture photo and already using camera and know to do things at ease, then join in event coverage department.
know to code and solve problems and make decisions super fast, join the travel in android and web development department.
going well with machine learning skills and concepts related to it, join us here in the Machine Learning department.
been a cloud lover and worked on cloud computing or applications based on cloud and wanna have fun here, join us on google cloud platform department.
you can create and develop good and great unique contents that impress people a lot, join us in content writing department.
be a part of DSC SMVEC and grab yourself an opportunity to hold
yourself a position in the core team. Say proud that ' I am a Core Team Member ' Waoh!


| None. |
|
I'm not sure the practical usage of this command, but basically, you can control where you INSERT the current TYPE object into the TYPE collection. When you create a new Type object with the NEW command, it is automatically appended to the END of the collection. Using INSERT along with BEFORE and AFTER (and electively FIRST and LAST) to put the Type object exactly where you want it. Sounds confusing - and chances are likely you'll never need this ability. But its here if you need it. Check the example.
See also: Type, New, Before, After, First, Last, Each, Delete. |
|
; INSERT example
; Define a CHAIR type with a created field to track what order it was created in. Type CHAIR Field created End Type ; Create 10 chairs, setting created field to the order of creation For t = 1 To 10 room.chair= New Chair room\created = t Next ; Make a NEW chair (the 11th) room.chair= New Chair ; Set its created value to 11 room\created=11 ; Now, let's insert this chair BEFORE the first one in the collection Insert room Before First Chair ; Let's iterate through all the chairs, and show their creation order For room.chair = Each chair Print room\created Next |


This chapter provides information about the internal structure of the library, how to control the configuration when building it, and how to add new support to the library. The following sections are found in this chapter:
Configuration defines are split into three areas:
If the define COMPRESSION_SUPPORT is not defined then a default set of compression schemes is automatically configured:
To override the default compression behaviour define COMPRESSION_SUPPORT and then one or more additional defines to enable configuration of the appropriate codecs (see the table below); e.g.
#define COMPRESSION_SUPPORT #define CCITT_SUPPORT #define PACKBITS_SUPPORTSeveral other compression schemes are configured separately from the default set because they depend on ancillary software packages that are not distributed with libtiff.
Support for JPEG compression is controlled by JPEG_SUPPORT. The JPEG codec that comes with libtiff is designed for use with release 5 or later of the Independent JPEG Group's freely available software distribution. This software can be retrieved from the directory ftp.uu.net:/graphics/jpeg/.
Enabling JPEG support automatically enables support for the TIFF 6.0 colorimetry and YCbCr-related tags.
Experimental support for the deflate algorithm is controlled by DEFLATE_SUPPORT. The deflate codec that comes with libtiff is designed for use with version 0.99 or later of the freely available libz library written by Jean-loup Gailly and Mark Adler. The data format used by this library is described in the files zlib-3.1.doc, and deflate-1.1.doc, available in the directory ftp.uu.net:/pub/archiving/zip/doc. The library can be retried from the directory ftp.uu.net:/pub/archiving/zip/zlib/ (or try quest.jpl.nasa.gov:/beta/zlib/).
The deflate algorithm is experimental. Do not expect to exchange files using this compression scheme; it is included only because the similar, and more common, LZW algorithm is claimed to be governed by licensing restrictions.
By default tiffconf.h defines COLORIMETRY_SUPPORT, YCBCR_SUPPORT, and CMYK_SUPPORT.
| Define | Description |
|---|---|
| CCITT_SUPPORT | CCITT Group 3 and 4 algorithms (compression codes 2, 3, 4, and 32771) |
| PACKBITS_SUPPORT | Macintosh PackBits algorithm (compression 32773) |
| LZW_SUPPORT | Lempel-Ziv & Welch (LZW) algorithm (compression 5) |
| THUNDER_SUPPORT | 4-bit run-length encoding scheme from ThunderScan (compression 32809) |
| NEXT_SUPPORT | 2-bit encoding scheme used by NeXT (compression 32766) |
| OJPEG_SUPPORT | obsolete JPEG scheme defined in the 6.0 spec (compression 6) |
| JPEG_SUPPORT | current JPEG scheme defined in TTN2 (compression 7) |
| ZIP_SUPPORT | experimental Deflate scheme (compression 32946) |
| PIXARLOG_SUPPORT | Pixar's compression scheme for high-resolution color images (compression 32909) |
| SGILOG_SUPPORT | SGI's compression scheme for high-resolution color images (compression 34676 and 34677) |
| COLORIMETRY_SUPPORT | support for the TIFF 6.0 colorimetry tags |
| YCBCR_SUPPORT | support for the TIFF 6.0 YCbCr-related tags |
| CMYK_SUPPORT | support for the TIFF 6.0 CMYK-related tags |
| ICC_SUPPORT | support for the ICC Profile tag; see The ICC Profile Format Specification, Annex B.3 "Embedding ICC Profiles in TIFF Files"; available at http://www.color.org |
In general, the code is guaranteed to work only on SGI machines. In practice it is highly portable to any 32-bit or 64-bit system and much work has been done to insure portability to 16-bit systems. If you encounter portability problems please return fixes so that future distributions can be improved.
The software is written to assume an ANSI C compilation environment. If your compiler does not support ANSI function prototypes, const, and <stdarg.h> then you will have to make modifications to the software. In the past I have tried to support compilers without const and systems without <stdarg.h>, but I am no longer interested in these antiquated environments. With the general availability of the freely available GCC compiler, I see no reason to incorporate modifications to the software for these purposes.
An effort has been made to isolate as many of the operating system-dependencies as possible in two files: tiffcomp.h and libtiff/tif_<os>.c. The latter file contains operating system-specific routines to do I/O and I/O-related operations. The UNIX (tif_unix.c), Macintosh (tif_apple.c), and VMS (tif_vms.c) code has had the most use; the MS/DOS support (tif_msdos.c) assumes some level of UNIX system call emulation (i.e. open, read, write, fstat, malloc, free).
Native CPU byte order is determined on the fly by the library and does not need to be specified. The HOST_FILLORDER and HOST_BIGENDIAN definitions are not currently used, but may be employed by codecs for optimization purposes.
The following defines control general portability:
| BSDTYPES | Define this if your system does NOT define the usual BSD typedefs: u_char, u_short, u_int, u_long. |
| HAVE_IEEEFP | Define this as 0 or 1 according to the floating point format suported by the machine. If your machine does not support IEEE floating point then you will need to add support to tif_machdep.c to convert between the native format and IEEE format. |
| HAVE_MMAP | Define this if there is mmap-style support for mapping files into memory (used only to read data). |
| HOST_FILLORDER | Define the native CPU bit order: one of FILLORDER_MSB2LSB or FILLORDER_LSB2MSB |
| HOST_BIGENDIAN | Define the native CPU byte order: 1 if big-endian (Motorola) or 0 if little-endian (Intel); this may be used in codecs to optimize code |
On UNIX systems HAVE_MMAP is defined through the running of
the configure script; otherwise support for memory-mapped
files is disabled.
Note that tiffcomp.h defines HAVE_IEEEFP to be
1 (BSDTYPES is not defined).
Types and Portability
The software makes extensive use of C typedefs to promote portability.
Two sets of typedefs are used, one for communication with clients
of the library and one for internal data structures and parsing of the
TIFF format. There are interactions between these two to be careful
of, but for the most part you should be able to deal with portability
purely by fiddling with the following machine-dependent typedefs:
| uint8 | 8-bit unsigned integer | tiff.h |
| int8 | 8-bit signed integer | tiff.h |
| uint16 | 16-bit unsigned integer | tiff.h |
| int16 | 16-bit signed integer | tiff.h |
| uint32 | 32-bit unsigned integer | tiff.h |
| int32 | 32-bit signed integer | tiff.h |
| dblparam_t | promoted type for floats | tiffcomp.h |
(to clarify dblparam_t, it is the type that float parameters are promoted to when passed by value in a function call.)
The following typedefs are used throughout the library and interfaces to refer to certain objects whose size is dependent on the TIFF image structure:
| typedef unsigned int ttag_t; | directory tag |
| typedef uint16 tdir_t; | directory index |
| typedef uint16 tsample_t; | sample number |
| typedef uint32 tstrip_t; | strip number |
| typedef uint32 ttile_t; | tile number |
| typedef int32 tsize_t; | i/o size in bytes |
| typedef void* tdata_t; | image data ref |
| typedef void* thandle_t; | client data handle |
| typedef int32 toff_t; | file offset (should be off_t) |
| typedef unsigned char* tidata_t; | internal image data |
Note that tstrip_t, ttile_t, and tsize_t are constrained to be no more than 32-bit quantities by 32-bit fields they are stored in in the TIFF image. Likewise tsample_t is limited by the 16-bit field used to store the SamplesPerPixel tag. tdir_t constrains the maximum number of IFDs that may appear in an image and may be an arbitrary size (without penalty). ttag_t must be either int, unsigned int, pointer, or double because the library uses a varargs interface and ANSI C restricts the type of the parameter before an ellipsis to be a promoted type. toff_t is defined as int32 because TIFF file offsets are (unsigned) 32-bit quantities. A signed value is used because some interfaces return -1 on error (sigh). Finally, note that tidata_t is used internally to the library to manipulate internal data. User-specified data references are passed as opaque handles and only cast at the lowest layers where their type is presumed.
A codec, say foo, can have many different entry points:
TIFFInitfoo(tif, scheme)/* initialize scheme and setup entry points in tif */ fooSetupDecode(tif) /* called once per IFD after tags has been frozen */ fooPreDecode(tif, sample)/* called once per strip/tile, after data is read, but before the first row is decoded */ fooDecode*(tif, bp, cc, sample)/* decode cc bytes of data into the buffer */ fooDecodeRow(...) /* called to decode a single scanline */ fooDecodeStrip(...) /* called to decode an entire strip */ fooDecodeTile(...) /* called to decode an entire tile */ fooSetupEncode(tif) /* called once per IFD after tags has been frozen */ fooPreEncode(tif, sample)/* called once per strip/tile, before the first row in a strip/tile is encoded */ fooEncode*(tif, bp, cc, sample)/* encode cc bytes of user data (bp) */ fooEncodeRow(...) /* called to decode a single scanline */ fooEncodeStrip(...) /* called to decode an entire strip */ fooEncodeTile(...) /* called to decode an entire tile */ fooPostEncode(tif) /* called once per strip/tile, just before data is written */ fooSeek(tif, row) /* seek forwards row scanlines from the beginning of a strip (row will always be >0 and <rows/strip */ fooCleanup(tif) /* called when compression scheme is replaced by user */
Note that the encoding and decoding variants are only needed when
a compression algorithm is dependent on the structure of the data.
For example, Group 3 2D encoding and decoding maintains a reference
scanline. The sample parameter identifies which sample is to be
encoded or decoded if the image is organized with PlanarConfig=2
(separate planes). This is important for algorithms such as JPEG.
If PlanarConfig=1 (interleaved), then sample will always be 0.
Other Comments
The library handles most I/O buffering. There are two data buffers
when decoding data: a raw data buffer that holds all the data in a
strip, and a user-supplied scanline buffer that compression schemes
place decoded data into. When encoding data the data in the
user-supplied scanline buffer is encoded into the raw data buffer (from
where it is written). Decoding routines should never have to explicitly
read data -- a full strip/tile's worth of raw data is read and scanlines
never cross strip boundaries. Encoding routines must be cognizant of
the raw data buffer size and call TIFFFlushData1() when necessary.
Note that any pending data is automatically flushed when a new strip/tile is
started, so there's no need do that in the tif_postencode routine (if
one exists). Bit order is automatically handled by the library when
a raw strip or tile is filled. If the decoded samples are interpreted
by the decoding routine before they are passed back to the user, then
the decoding logic must handle byte-swapping by overriding the
tif_postdecode
routine (set it to TIFFNoPostDecode) and doing the required work
internally. For an example of doing this look at the horizontal
differencing code in the routines in tif_predict.c.
The variables tif_rawcc, tif_rawdata, and tif_rawcp in a TIFF structure are associated with the raw data buffer. tif_rawcc must be non-zero for the library to automatically flush data. The variable tif_scanlinesize is the size a user's scanline buffer should be. The variable tif_tilesize is the size of a tile for tiled images. This should not normally be used by compression routines, except where it relates to the compression algorithm. That is, the cc parameter to the tif_decode* and tif_encode* routines should be used in terminating decompression/compression. This ensures these routines can be used, for example, to decode/encode entire strips of data.
In general, if you have a new compression algorithm to add, work from the code for an existing routine. In particular, tif_dumpmode.c has the trivial code for the "nil" compression scheme, tif_packbits.c is a simple byte-oriented scheme that has to watch out for buffer boundaries, and tif_lzw.c has the LZW scheme that has the most complexity -- it tracks the buffer boundary at a bit level. Of course, using a private compression scheme (or private tags) limits the portability of your TIFF files.


Unorphanize
Helper function to wrap the last X words in an HTML tag to prevent them from wrapping.
Caveats
- This script doesn’t check if text is visible (possible future enhancement)
- Using this inside of links or headings could cause issues in VoiceOver on iOS
- See http://axesslab.com/text-splitting/ for solutions
Install
yarn add @threespot/unorphanize
Usage
// ES6 module
import Unorphanize from "@threespot/unorphanize";
// For transpiled ES5 code, import this file:
// import Unorphanize from<EMAIL_ADDRESS>const nodes = document.querySelectorAll("[data-orphans]");
nodes.forEach(function(el) {
var u = new Unorphanize(el, {
wordCount: 2, // number of words to prevent wrapping [default: 2]
wrapEl: "span", // wrapper element tag [default: "span"]
inlineStyles: true, // Add “white-space: nowrap;” to elements as inline style [default: true]
className: "custom-class", // Custom class to add to wrapper [default: ""]
append: "" // HTML to append to wrapper [default: ""]
});
});
Example:

First second third fourth fifth sixth.

Becomes:

First second third fourth fifth sixth.

To support setting wordCount
in the HTML, you could do something like this:
import Unorphanize from "@threespot/unorphanize";
const nodes = document.querySelectorAll("[data-orphans]");
nodes.forEach(function(el) {
const options = {};
// Check for custom word count
const wordCount = el.getAttribute("data-orphans");
// Set custom word count if defined (defaults to 2)
if (wordCount) {
options.wordCount = wordCount;
}
var u = new Unorphanize(el, options);
});
Example:

First second third fourth fifth sixth.

Becomes:

First second third fourth fifth sixth.

We recommend using a custom class instead of inline styles to allow wrapping in small viewports.
const nodes = document.querySelectorAll("[data-orphans]");
nodes.forEach(function(el) {
var u = new Unorphanize(el, {
inlineStyles: false,
className: "nowrap"
});
});
Example CSS
@media all and (min-width: 320px) {
.nowrap {
white-space: nowrap !important;
}
}
Example HTML:

First second third fourth.

Becomes:

First second third fourth.

License
Unorphanize is free software and may be redistributed under the terms of the MIT license.
About Threespot
Threespot is an independent digital agency hell-bent on helping those, and only those, who are committed to helping others. Find out more at https://www.threespot.com.


{% extends "minimal-layout.html" %} {% block page_title %} NHS Service finder {% endblock %} {% block content %} Back Service Type Glossary Patient GP (optional) Search by GP name, surgery or address. Type at least 3 characters to filter the list. Sussex - West Hoathly Surgery (Branch) - East Grinstead Ashmore Park Surgery, Griffiths Drive, Wolverhampton Barnsley, South Yorkshire (Grimethorpe Surgery) Barnsley, SYorkshire (The Cudworth Centre, branch of Grimethorpe Surgery) Bassetlaw (Misterton Group Practice, Gringley - Branch of Riverside HC) Berry Lane Medical Centre - (Longridge) Fellview Healthcare Limited - (Griffin Close Surgery Branch) - Cumbria Griffins Brook Medical Centre (Bournville-Birmingham) Grimsby, NELincs (Birkwood Medical Centre) Grimsby, NELincs (Chantry Health Group) Grimsby, NELincs (Core Care Family Practice - Formerly Dr R Kumar) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr AP Kumar & Partners - Stirling St) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr A Sinha) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr Babu - Branch) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr Babu - Weelsby View) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr Biswas-Saha) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr Chalmers and Meier - Weelsby View) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr R Mathews - Cromwell Rd Branch) Grimsby, NELincs (Dr R Mathews - Stirling Street) Grimsby, NELincs (Fieldhouse Medical Group) Grimsby, NELincs (Greenlands - Stirling St - formerly Dr Bedi) Grimsby, NELincs (Healing Health Centre) Grimsby, NELincs (Humberview Surgery) Grimsby, NELincs (Littlefield Practice - Dr Collett & Partners) Grimsby, NELincs (Open Door Practice) Grimsby, NELincs (Pelham Medical Group) Grimsby, NELincs (Quayside Medical Centre) Grimsby, NELincs (Raj Medical Centre) Grimsby, NELincs (Roxton at Weelsby View) formerly Ashwood Grimsby, NELincs (Roxton Practice, Weelsby View - formerly Dr Jethwa) Grimsby, NELincs (Scartho Medical Centre) Grimsby, NELincs (Woodford Medical Centre) Grimston Medical Centre - Grimston, Norfolk GP: Longrigg Medical Centre (GATDOC) Maghull Family Surgery (Formerly Dr Griffiths) - Westway - Maghull Medway - Stonecross and West Drive Srgries Chatham- Brnch GP Practice: The Old Court House Surgery (Dr Grice & Partners), Sutton, London Stonebridge Surgery Longridge - Preston Sussex - Grove House Surgery - Arthur Griffiths Clinic (branch) Sussex - Judges Close Surgery - East Grinstead Sussex - Moatfield Surgery - East Grinstead Sussex - Ship Street Surgery - East Grinstead Oxfordshire - Dr K Griffiths, Oak Street Surgery - Bicester {% endblock %}
Patient GP (optional)
Search by GP name, surgery or address. Type at least 3 characters to filter the list.


LUG
XJTLU
Home
Notes
Learn by
doing
.
Polish your résumé by creating a project on Github.
Achieve higher GPA by reading peer-reviewed course guides.
Write an operating system from scratch.
SURF, hackathons and etc.
XJTLU-LUG 2018


Press
space
to make it jump!
Thanks to,
Key.css
- a cool
stylesheet
for rendering beautiful keyboard-style elements.


Hi, my name is Ismael Ramadan, Im circassian, I studied at Prince Hamzah School, and now Im studying at Ltuc as a software engineer, I didn't work at somthing offical yet, but hopfully I will in the future, and one of my goals is to work at a big company like Amazon or Microsoft or any Pc related companies.
Fun fact about me I'm a person that would do something for hours and hours if I engoyed it with no single break!, I was born in Amman,Jordan in 13/5/1998 so yes im 23 years old, but I look like a 16 years old person I get that alot :D, My last name isn't Ramadan that is just the name of our great great grandfather, its actually lebzo.
My GitHub! My Facebook My Instagram!


The Source Code
Since CocoaPad is open source, the source code is given away. The code, along with some other stuff, is located in the /Extras/Source/
folder on your installer disk image. The actual Xcode project files and Objective-C source code are in the /Extras/Source/Source Code/
folder.
The project files require Mac OS X 10.3 Panther and Xcode Tools 1.0 or later (they are .xcode files). The source files (.h and .m files) can be viewed with any text editor. |
Be sure to read the README in the Source/
folder, so you know which files are which, how to build, etc.
Although CocoaPad is relatively simple, you might want to understand the code better. That's why we've included the Developer Notes
file, which contains notes on the program, the files, etc. Developer Notes is located in /Extras/Source/
.
If you have problems, you can always contact me at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Have fun!


India Basic 1.0 generated from template.
This keyboard makes use of deadkeys.
To get "ā", type "RALT - a". This is available on a, e, i, o, and u.
To get "ê", type "SHIFT RALT ^ e". This is available on e and o.
To get "ĕ", type "SHIFT RALT ( e". This is available on e, h, o, and u.
To get "ḍ", type "RALT . d". This is available on d, h, l, m, n, r, s, and t.
To get "ḏ", type "SHIFT RALT _ d". This is available on d, h, k, l, n, r, and t.
To get "ñ", type "SHIFT RALT ~ n"
To get "ž", type "SHIFT RALT < z". This is only available on z.
A number of other combining marks are available on deadkeys. Typing a letter + RALT + comma with any of the following: ^*9(o-.:_>`~|' can be used to produce the following: âa̐a̮ăḁāạa̤a̱ȧàãa̲á
(c) 2018 SIL International


This syllabus is subject to change based on specific class needs, especially the schedule. Significant deviations will be discussed in class. Individual exceptions to the policies and schedule are granted only in cases of true emergency. Please make arrangements with me if an emergency arises.
An introduction to the concepts and techniques of database systems. Includes history and motivation of database systems, data modeling, rational database, SQL, transaction processing, distributed databases.
The required textbook is:
The textbook webpage is a great source of additional information, including solutions to practice exercises, scripts to load the sample data, and tips on using specific databases.
We may occasionally have readings from other sources, which will either be emailed to students or posted to the schedule below.
Additionally, there are many resources on the web for learning about databases, and especially about SQL. One good is this MySQL Tutorial.
In class I will often make use of the Socrative app, so you’ll need to install this on your phones. We will also occasionally write SQL queries together in repl.it, so you will need an account there.
In terms of Database Management Systems we will usually stick to SQLite and MySQL.
Zoom classes: If the instructor’s video is turned on, yours should be, too. Any computer, tablet, or phone usage should be directly related to the course, e.g., Zoom or Socrative. Anything else is rude and distracting to others. Inappropriate use of devices, or not turning your video on, will result in a low participation grade. To fully participate in class, you should plan to attend each Zoom session on a laptop or desktop computer, NOT a tablet or phone. This will allow you to take part in any live-coding exercises with the rest of the class. Please let the instructor know ahead of time if this is not possible for any particular class meeting.
Late assignments: You are allotted a total of 5 days. You may apply these to any homework assignment (NOT projects) as you see fit and turn in your solutions with no penalty. However, you may use at most 2 on any individual assignment. The point is to give you some flexibility for illnesses, long trips, etc. I am unlikely to grant further extensions. If you are selected to give a presentation based on a homework exercise and wish to use late days, you must schedule your presentation for the next class period, although a different exercise may be chosen by the instructor!
Academic dishonesty: Monmouth College’s official policy on academic dishonesty can be found here. You are responsible for reading and complying with that policy.
In this course, any violation of the academic honesty policy will have varying consequences depending on the severity of the infraction as judged by the instructor. Minimally, a violation will result in an “F” or 0 points on the assignment in question. Additionally, the student’s course grade may be lowered by one letter grade. In severe cases, the student will be assigned a course grade of “F” and dismissed from the class. All cases of academic dishonesty must be reported to the Associate Dean who may decide to recommend further action to the Admissions and Academic Status Committee, including suspension or dismissal. It is assumed that students will educate themselves regarding what is considered to be academic dishonesty, so excuses or claims of ignorance will not mitigate the consequences of any violations
Collaboration: We encourage you to make use of the resources available to you – it is fine to seek help from a friend, tutor, instructor, internet, etc. However, copying of answers and any act worth of the label “cheating” is never permissible! In addition to listing your sources and collaborators, you should be producing your own writeup in your own words. By “your own words,” we mean you should be producing the text yourself, without some external aid. Verbatim copying of text is specifically disallowed, but so is taking a source and rearranging some phrases and changing some variable names to create a derivative version! Such behavior is definitely NOT “using your own words.” It does not matter if you helped contribute to this source text with others, since then you are still not the sole author of the text. The point of collaborating on an assignment is not to produce a jointly authored set of solutions, since that violates the course policies. Instead, it is to help you solve the problems, which sometimes involve a bit of creativity. After you have jointly come up with the ideas you need to solve the problems, though, you should part ways with your group and sit down to do the writing by yourself. I also advise against sharing the writeup you submit with others, since if someone else uses your text as a source for their own solution (with or without your permission), you will also be implicated in the violation of the academic integrity policy. In any case, if two nearly identical solutions are received, we have no way of tell which is the original, and the policy is to not award credit for either submission.
General expectations: In short, I expect you to be respectful of others and take responsibility for your own learning. You are here to learn, so work hard and be professional.
Just attending class is not sufficient to truly learn the material. Read the text, use the resources available at Monmouth College, and go beyond the material.
If you miss class, you are responsible for everything covered on that day. College is, in some sense, your job. Take pride in creating quality work. Staple your assignments, label problems, and present your answers neatly and orderly.
Your job is to convince me that you have learned the material – show your work! Even if you do not know a particular answer, guide me through your thought process.
The weekly workload for this course will vary by student and by week but should be about 13 hours per week on average. The following table provides a rough estimate of the distribution of time over different course components for a 16 week semester, as well as detailing the type, amount, and relative value of all assignments.
| Category | Amount | Final Grade Weight | Time/Week (Hours) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lectures/Class | 42 | 10% (Participation) | 2.5 |
| Homework | 8–10 | 20% | 3 |
| Presentations | 1–3 | 10% | - |
| Exam Study | - | - | 2 |
| Exams | 3 | 30% | - |
| Projects | 2 | 30% | 3.5 |
| Reading/Unstructured Study | - | - | 2 |
| Total | 100% | 13 |
Homework assignments may include written exercises and/or programming assignments. When homework is due, the instructor may select 1 or more exercises to be presented. Students will be randomly selected (with replacement) to present their solution.
Each exam will focus primarily, but not necessarily exclusively, on the material covered since the previous exam.
In-class presentations will be graded on a simple 3-point scale:
If you are unable to attend a class, you must notify the instructor prior to the class. If you do not, and you are randomly selected to present, you will receive a 0. It is possible that you are never randomly selected, in which case you will receive full credit for this portion of the grade.
Your participation grade is based on a variety of activities. During class I will often make use of the Socrative app, so you’ll need to install this on your phones. Participating in Socrative questions and with in-class group activities is required for a decent participation grade; an A includes asking questions either in class or in office hours.
Your final grade is based on a weighted average of particular assignment categories. You can estimate your current grade based on your scores and these weights. You may always visit the instructor outside of class to discuss your current standing. Assignments and final grades use a standard grading scale shown below and will not be curved except in rare cases when deemed necessary by the instructor.
This courses uses a standard grading scale. Assignments and final grades will not be curved except in rare cases when its deemed necessary by the instructor. Percentage grades translate to letter grades as follows:
| Score | Grade |
|---|---|
| 94–100 | A |
| 90–93 | A- |
| 88–89 | B+ |
| 82–87 | B |
| 80–81 | B- |
| 78–79 | C+ |
| 72–77 | C |
| 70–71 | C- |
| 68–69 | D+ |
| 62–67 | D |
| 60–61 | D- |
| 0–59 | F |
You are always welcome to challenge a grade that you feel is unfair or calculated incorrectly. Mistakes made in your favor will never be corrected to lower your grade. Mistakes made not in your favor will be corrected. Basically, after the initial grading your score can only go up as the result of a challenge*.
You are always welcome to challenge a grade that you feel is unfair or calculated incorrectly. Mistakes made in your favor will never be corrected to lower your grade. Mistakes made not in your favor will be corrected. Basically, after the initial grading your score can only go up as the result of a challenge.
The following tentative calendar should give you a feel for how work is distributed throughout the semester. Assignments and events are listed in the week they are due or when they occur. This calendar is subject to change based on the circumstances of the course.
Note: All readings should be done before the class period in which they are listed below.
Each day’s slides/notes can be found in this shared folder. You will need to be logged in to your Monmouth College account to see the folder. If I have not uploaded the week’s slides by Friday afternoon you are free to email me a reminder.
| Date | Topic | Assignments and Readings |
|---|---|---|
| Mon 01/25 (Week 1) | Logistics, Intro | Chapter 1 |
| Wed 01/27 | The Relational Model | Chapter 2 |
| Fri 01/29 | Relational Algebra | Homework 1 |
| Mon 02/01 (Week 2) | Basic SQL: SELECT | 3.1-3.3 |
| Wed 02/03 | More SQL, Set Operations | 3.4-3.5 |
| Fri 02/05 | Aggregating, Grouping, and more | Homework 2, 3.6-3.8 |
| Mon 02/08 (Week 3) | Nested Subqueries | 3.8 |
| Wed 02/10 | Database Modifications | 3.9-3.10 |
| Fri 02/12 | Practice Exercises | Homework 3 |
| Mon 02/15 (Week 4) | Joins | 4.1 |
| Wed 02/17 | Views, Transactions, Integrity Constraints | 4.2-4.6 |
| Fri 02/19 | Practice Exercises | |
| Mon 02/22 (Week 5) | Functions, Procedures, Triggers | 5.2-5.3 |
| Wed 02/24 | Query Practice/Review | |
| Fri 02/26 | Exam 1 | |
| Mon 03/01 (Week 6) | Access via Programming Languages | 5.1 |
| Wed 03/03 | Security | 4.7 |
| Fri 03/05 | Entity-Relationship Model | 6.1-6.5, Project 1 |
| Mon 03/08 (Week 7) | Exam 1 Solutions, Advanced Data Modeling | 6.6-6.7, 6.10 |
| Wed 03/10 | More E-R Design | 6.8-6.11, Project Enterprise chosen |
| (Fri 03/12) | (No class – Pseudo-spring break) | |
| Mon 03/15 (Week 8) | (No class) | |
| Wed 03/17 | Decomposition | 7.1-7.4 |
| Fri 03/19 | Functional Dependency Theory | 7.4-7.5, E-R Checkpoint meeting deadline |
| Mon 03/22 (Week 9) | Normal Forms | Review 7.1-7.5 |
| Wed 03/24 | Multivalued Dependencies | 7.6-7.11 |
| Fri 03/26 | Complex Data Types | Chapter 8, Relational checkpoint |
| Mon 03/29 (Week 10) | Web Apps | 9.1-9.5 |
| Wed 03/31 | Advanced Web Apps | 9.6-9.10 |
| (Fri 04/02 – Easter Break) | ||
| Mon 04/05 (Week 11) | Data Analytics | 11.1-11.3 |
| Wed 04/07 | Project 1 Questions | Project 1 due |
| Fri 04/09 | Project 1 Presentations | Project 2 start |
| Mon 04/12 (Week 12) | Project 1 Presentations | |
| Wed 04/14 | Project 1 Presentations | |
| Fri 04/16 | Physical Storage | Chapter 12, App. checkpoint 1 |
| Mon 04/19 (Week 13) | Data Storage Structures | Chapter 13 |
| Wed 04/21 | B-Tree Indexing | 14.1-14.3 |
| Fri 04/23 | Query Processing I | 15.1-15.5, App. checkpoint 2, Homework 4 |
| Mon 04/26 (Week 14) | Query Processing II | |
| Wed 04/28 | Transactions | 17.1-17.6 |
| Fri 04/30 | Database Architectures | 20.1-20.5 |
| Mon 05/03 (Week 15) | Big Data | Chapter 10 |
| Wed 05/05 | Project 2 Presentations | |
| Fri 05/07 | Project 2 Due | |
| Tue 05/11 3:00 PM | Final Exam (take-home) |
Mental Health and Counseling Services: Monmouth College provides cost-free, professional mental health counseling to support you and to help you manage challenges that may impact your personal and academic success. The Counseling Center is located in the upper level of Poling Hall, offices 204 and 216, and the hours are Monday-Friday, 8:30 AM – 5:00 PM. To request a confidential appointment on-line, click here or email the center, Cindy Beadles or Tom Caudill.
Student Success and Accessibility Services offers FREE resources to assist Monmouth College students with their academic success. Programs include supplemental instruction for difficult classes, drop-in and appointment tutoring, and individual academic coaching. The office is here to help students excel academically, since everyone can work toward better grades, practice stronger study skills, and mange their time better.
Accessibility Services: If you have a disability or had academic accommodations in high school or another college, you may be eligible for academic accommodations at Monmouth College under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Monmouth College is committed to equal educational access. To discuss any of the services offered, please call or visit Student Success and Accessibility Services. SSAS is located in the ACE space on the first floor of Hewes Library, opposite Einstein Bros. Bagels. They can be reached at<PHONE_NUMBER> or via email at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Hewes Library: Librarians can help you find appropriate sources for a speech, research paper, or project. #JustAsk!
Library Hours: library.monmouthcollege.edu/home/hours
How to contact a Hewes librarian:


1. Is this fragment comprehensible to you?
2. Does this fragment evoke a question for you?
3. In the fragment, highlight the main phrase that evoked this question. *
Based on your responses we have no further questions about this fragment.
For you, the first part evoked the following question:
4. Was your question answered in the continuation?
5. Enter the (complete/partial) answer in your own words:
6. In the fragment, highlight the main phrase suggesting this answer.
*


Home
About
Products
Blog
Contact
Contact Us
Got a question? We'd love to hear from you. Send us a message
and we'll respond as soon as possible.
Name*
Email Address*
Message*
SUBMIT


| Option | Setting | Default Value |
|---|---|---|
| Device | 5CSXFC6D6F31C8ES | |
| Top-level entity name | SoCKit_top | SoCKit_top |
| Family name | Cyclone V | Cyclone IV GX |
| Analysis & Synthesis Message Level | High | Medium |
| Use smart compilation | Off | Off |
| Enable parallel Assembler and TimeQuest Timing Analyzer during compilation | On | On |
| Enable compact report table | Off | Off |
| Restructure Multiplexers | Auto | Auto |
| MLAB Add Timing Constraints For Mixed-Port Feed-Through Mode Setting Don't Care | Off | Off |
| Create Debugging Nodes for IP Cores | Off | Off |
| Preserve fewer node names | On | On |
| Disable OpenCore Plus hardware evaluation | Off | Off |
| Verilog Version | Verilog_2001 | Verilog_2001 |
| VHDL Version | VHDL_1993 | VHDL_1993 |
| State Machine Processing | Auto | Auto |
| Safe State Machine | Off | Off |
| Extract Verilog State Machines | On | On |
| Extract VHDL State Machines | On | On |
| Ignore Verilog initial constructs | Off | Off |
| Iteration limit for constant Verilog loops | 5000 | 5000 |
| Iteration limit for non-constant Verilog loops | 250 | 250 |
| Add Pass-Through Logic to Inferred RAMs | On | On |
| Infer RAMs from Raw Logic | On | On |
| Parallel Synthesis | On | On |
| DSP Block Balancing | Auto | Auto |
| NOT Gate Push-Back | On | On |
| Power-Up Don't Care | On | On |
| Remove Redundant Logic Cells | Off | Off |
| Remove Duplicate Registers | On | On |
| Ignore CARRY Buffers | Off | Off |
| Ignore CASCADE Buffers | Off | Off |
| Ignore GLOBAL Buffers | Off | Off |
| Ignore ROW GLOBAL Buffers | Off | Off |
| Ignore LCELL Buffers | Off | Off |
| Ignore SOFT Buffers | On | On |
| Limit AHDL Integers to 32 Bits | Off | Off |
| Optimization Technique | Balanced | Balanced |
| Carry Chain Length | 70 | 70 |
| Auto Carry Chains | On | On |
| Auto Open-Drain Pins | On | On |
| Perform WYSIWYG Primitive Resynthesis | Off | Off |
| Auto ROM Replacement | On | On |
| Auto RAM Replacement | On | On |
| Auto DSP Block Replacement | On | On |
| Auto Shift Register Replacement | Auto | Auto |
| Allow Shift Register Merging across Hierarchies | Auto | Auto |
| Auto Clock Enable Replacement | On | On |
| Strict RAM Replacement | Off | Off |
| Allow Synchronous Control Signals | On | On |
| Force Use of Synchronous Clear Signals | Off | Off |
| Auto Resource Sharing | Off | Off |
| Allow Any RAM Size For Recognition | Off | Off |
| Allow Any ROM Size For Recognition | Off | Off |
| Allow Any Shift Register Size For Recognition | Off | Off |
| Use LogicLock Constraints during Resource Balancing | On | On |
| Ignore translate_off and synthesis_off directives | Off | Off |
| Timing-Driven Synthesis | On | On |
| Report Parameter Settings | On | On |
| Report Source Assignments | On | On |
| Report Connectivity Checks | On | On |
| Ignore Maximum Fan-Out Assignments | Off | Off |
| Synchronization Register Chain Length | 3 | 3 |
| PowerPlay Power Optimization | Normal compilation | Normal compilation |
| HDL message level | Level2 | Level2 |
| Suppress Register Optimization Related Messages | Off | Off |
| Number of Removed Registers Reported in Synthesis Report | 5000 | 5000 |
| Number of Swept Nodes Reported in Synthesis Report | 5000 | 5000 |
| Number of Inverted Registers Reported in Synthesis Report | 100 | 100 |
| Clock MUX Protection | On | On |
| Auto Gated Clock Conversion | Off | Off |
| Block Design Naming | Auto | Auto |
| SDC constraint protection | Off | Off |
| Synthesis Effort | Auto | Auto |
| Shift Register Replacement - Allow Asynchronous Clear Signal | On | On |
| Pre-Mapping Resynthesis Optimization | Off | Off |
| Disable Register Merging Across Hierarchies | Auto | Auto |
| Resource Aware Inference For Block RAM | On | On |
| Synthesis Seed | 1 | 1 |
| Automatic Parallel Synthesis | On | On |


Fresh from the Oven
Breads
Our breads are made daily from highest-quality whole grain flour, water, salt, and yeast or sourdough starter. Simply and naturally, and never any preservatives. Patience is key to achieving the proper level of fermentation and baking each loaf to perfection. Available in whole grain, sourdough, olive loaf, classic rye, and potato-onion.
Our breads are proudly carried by over a dozen local restaraunts, used in everything from sandwiches to bread bowls.
Muffins
Every day, we have offer a large selection of muffins, including blueberry, multi-berry, bran, corn, lemon-poppyseed, and chocolate. Our muffins are made from scratch each day. Stop by to see our seasonal muffin flavors!
Check out our "About" page to learn more about our process. You can also buy our cookbook and make our delicious muffins at home!


Preview of settings shown on the left, change the settings on the right, and copy the result url to use at the bottom of the page.
Remember, you can resize and move the browser source in OBS. Change sizes and widths to change proportion, not final size in your stream.
Supported fonts include Arial, Times New Roman, Consolas, Courier, Verdana and Comic Sans MS
The preview updates when you click anywhere on the page outside the box you just updated.


Choose the view here
What hospitals do your neighbors go to?
By
Involution Studios
and
Macadamian
Open Data + Code
|
Feedback