<?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>1998 (8) TMI 624 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185852</link>
    <description>A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC merely because actual service of statutory notice is not independently proved at the threshold. Where the complaint alleges dispatch by registered post acknowledgment due and states that neither the postal cover nor the acknowledgment was returned, a presumption of service arises under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. That presumption is rebuttable, and questions such as correct dispatch, service at the proper address, and rebuttal by the accused are matters for evidence at trial, not for summary quashing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Aug 2016 16:31:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=439561" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (8) TMI 624 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185852</link>
      <description>A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is not liable to be quashed under Section 482 CrPC merely because actual service of statutory notice is not independently proved at the threshold. Where the complaint alleges dispatch by registered post acknowledgment due and states that neither the postal cover nor the acknowledgment was returned, a presumption of service arises under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. That presumption is rebuttable, and questions such as correct dispatch, service at the proper address, and rebuttal by the accused are matters for evidence at trial, not for summary quashing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Aug 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>