<?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 935 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391322</link>
    <description>The appellate court upheld the trial court&#039;s acquittal of the respondent in a case involving Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that the appellant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt, and the respondent successfully rebutted the presumption under Sections 139 and 118(a) of the Act. Emphasizing limited appellate jurisdiction in acquittal cases, the court dismissed the appeal, citing the trial court&#039;s reasonable findings supported by evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Jan 2020 09:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601442" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 935 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391322</link>
      <description>The appellate court upheld the trial court&#039;s acquittal of the respondent in a case involving Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found that the appellant failed to prove the existence of a legally enforceable debt, and the respondent successfully rebutted the presumption under Sections 139 and 118(a) of the Act. Emphasizing limited appellate jurisdiction in acquittal cases, the court dismissed the appeal, citing the trial court&#039;s reasonable findings supported by evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jan 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>