<?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>2020 (1) TMI 263 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390650</link>
    <description>Amended Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 applies to pending appeals against conviction under Section 138, even where the complaints were filed before the amendment, because the provision operates at the appellate stage and does not take away the substantive right of appeal. The provision was intended to curb delay in cheque dishonour litigation and permit deposit of a minimum portion of fine or compensation during appeal. Where suspension of sentence was made conditional on deposit of 25% of the compensation amount, non-compliance justified the appellate court in treating the suspension as vacated, and the challenge to that course failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Jan 2020 09:55:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=599709" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 263 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390650</link>
      <description>Amended Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 applies to pending appeals against conviction under Section 138, even where the complaints were filed before the amendment, because the provision operates at the appellate stage and does not take away the substantive right of appeal. The provision was intended to curb delay in cheque dishonour litigation and permit deposit of a minimum portion of fine or compensation during appeal. Where suspension of sentence was made conditional on deposit of 25% of the compensation amount, non-compliance justified the appellate court in treating the suspension as vacated, and the challenge to that course failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=390650</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>