<?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>2015 (12) TMI 1335 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270031</link>
    <description>A cheque issued only as security does not attract Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 unless an existing debt or liability is proved. On the facts stated, the complaint itself treated the cheque as security against alleged shortage of rice, but the evidence did not establish any shortage or subsisting liability when the cheque was issued. The record supported the view that the stock position remained intact. As the trial court&#039;s appreciation of evidence was not shown to be perverse or illegal, and two views were possible, the acquittal was left undisturbed and leave to appeal was declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2015 10:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=410721" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1335 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270031</link>
      <description>A cheque issued only as security does not attract Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 unless an existing debt or liability is proved. On the facts stated, the complaint itself treated the cheque as security against alleged shortage of rice, but the evidence did not establish any shortage or subsisting liability when the cheque was issued. The record supported the view that the stock position remained intact. As the trial court&#039;s appreciation of evidence was not shown to be perverse or illegal, and two views were possible, the acquittal was left undisturbed and leave to appeal was declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>