<?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>2019 (8) TMI 1088 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384899</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the judgment of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found no material alteration in the cheque, upheld the presumption of a legally recoverable debt as per Sections 139 and 118 of the Act, and emphasized the importance of credible evidence and proper examination-in-chief. The petitioner failed to provide substantial proof to support their contentions, leading to the dismissal of the petition.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 27 Aug 2019 06:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=584864" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1088 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384899</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the petition challenging the judgment of conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found no material alteration in the cheque, upheld the presumption of a legally recoverable debt as per Sections 139 and 118 of the Act, and emphasized the importance of credible evidence and proper examination-in-chief. The petitioner failed to provide substantial proof to support their contentions, leading to the dismissal of the petition.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384899</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>