https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393840 Where the cheque is claimed to be a security cheque and payment was stopped on the drawer's instructions, the effect on liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act depends on disputed questions of fact. Those issues, including whether a subsisting liability existed, must be tested on evidence before the trial court and cannot ordinarily justify quashing at the threshold under the High Court's inherent jurisdiction. Mere stop-payment instructions were held insufficient, by themselves, to warrant interference with the complaint proceedings. The request to quash was therefore rejected, and discharge was not available at that stage. en-us Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Mar 2020 10:28:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393840 Where the cheque is claimed to be a security cheque and payment was stopped on the drawer's instructions, the effect on liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act depends on disputed questions of fact. Those issues, including whether a subsisting liability existed, must be tested on evidence before the trial court and cannot ordinarily justify quashing at the threshold under the High Court's inherent jurisdiction. Mere stop-payment instructions were held insufficient, by themselves, to warrant interference with the complaint proceedings. The request to quash was therefore rejected, and discharge was not available at that stage. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393840