<?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>1966 (3) TMI 92 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200270</link>
    <description>A promissory note may be treated as duly executed where the maker signed it, the instrument was later completed by affixing additional stamps, and delivery followed. The Stamp Act requirement that a chargeable instrument be stamped before or at the time of execution was read pragmatically: execution was not confined to the moment of signature alone, and the note became complete only on final stamping and delivery. The Court also applied the principle that a negotiable instrument is completed by delivery, actual or constructive, under the Negotiable Instruments Act. On that basis, the challenge to the instrument failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Mar 2018 15:20:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=514578" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1966 (3) TMI 92 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200270</link>
      <description>A promissory note may be treated as duly executed where the maker signed it, the instrument was later completed by affixing additional stamps, and delivery followed. The Stamp Act requirement that a chargeable instrument be stamped before or at the time of execution was read pragmatically: execution was not confined to the moment of signature alone, and the note became complete only on final stamping and delivery. The Court also applied the principle that a negotiable instrument is completed by delivery, actual or constructive, under the Negotiable Instruments Act. On that basis, the challenge to the instrument failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 1966 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200270</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>