<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1989 (11) TMI 306 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156995</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the trial court and the High Court. The court held that the Bank was not negligent in either opening the account or collecting the cheques and drafts. Consequently, the Bank was entitled to the protection under Section 131 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the appeal was allowed without any order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Jul 2014 09:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=174020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1989 (11) TMI 306 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156995</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgments of the trial court and the High Court. The court held that the Bank was not negligent in either opening the account or collecting the cheques and drafts. Consequently, the Bank was entitled to the protection under Section 131 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the appeal was allowed without any order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 1989 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156995</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>