<?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>High Court Rules: Claims of Being a &#039;Sleeping Partner&#039; Insufficient to Quash Proceedings Under Negotiable Instruments Act.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=36523</link>
    <description>Commission of offence punishable u/s 138 read with Section 141 of NI Act - Mere averments in the petition that the writ petitioner/accused No.4 was a sleeping partner having no knowledge of the transaction in question is not sufficient to quash process issued against him. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:14:18 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:14:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=491487" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>High Court Rules: Claims of Being a &#039;Sleeping Partner&#039; Insufficient to Quash Proceedings Under Negotiable Instruments Act.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=36523</link>
      <description>Commission of offence punishable u/s 138 read with Section 141 of NI Act - Mere averments in the petition that the writ petitioner/accused No.4 was a sleeping partner having no knowledge of the transaction in question is not sufficient to quash process issued against him. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Oct 2017 12:14:18 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=36523</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>