<?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>1976 (1) TMI 175 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179577</link>
    <description>A collecting bank may be liable in conversion where it receives cheques drawn on another&#039;s property and credits the proceeds to an account opened in a false name, but it loses statutory protection if it cannot show good faith and absence of negligence. The true owner&#039;s own negligence in issuing the cheques, however, may operate as an estoppel if that negligence is the proximate cause of the loss. The article also notes that the plaint was treated as properly signed and presented, the claim was held capable of devolving on the Union of India and within limitation, and interest was declined because the loss was attributed to the plaintiff&#039;s negligence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Mar 2016 14:57:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=418972" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (1) TMI 175 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179577</link>
      <description>A collecting bank may be liable in conversion where it receives cheques drawn on another&#039;s property and credits the proceeds to an account opened in a false name, but it loses statutory protection if it cannot show good faith and absence of negligence. The true owner&#039;s own negligence in issuing the cheques, however, may operate as an estoppel if that negligence is the proximate cause of the loss. The article also notes that the plaint was treated as properly signed and presented, the claim was held capable of devolving on the Union of India and within limitation, and interest was declined because the loss was attributed to the plaintiff&#039;s negligence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Companies Law</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>