https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194468 Defences that the claim arose from a running account, that the cheques were only collateral security, and that presentment failed after the signatory's death were found untenable on the face of the record. The suit was treated as one on dishonoured cheques, with the antecedent loan serving only as consideration for the negotiable instruments and not as the immediate cause of action. On that footing, the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946 bar did not apply to the suit as framed. The defendants' letters were also held incapable of raising a substantial defence, though leave to defend was granted conditionally on deposit of the principal sum. en-us Mon, 24 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 09 Sep 2017 09:17:10 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194468 Defences that the claim arose from a running account, that the cheques were only collateral security, and that presentment failed after the signatory's death were found untenable on the face of the record. The suit was treated as one on dishonoured cheques, with the antecedent loan serving only as consideration for the negotiable instruments and not as the immediate cause of action. On that footing, the Bombay Money Lenders Act, 1946 bar did not apply to the suit as framed. The defendants' letters were also held incapable of raising a substantial defence, though leave to defend was granted conditionally on deposit of the principal sum. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 24 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194468