<?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 (11) TMI 506 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400751</link>
    <description>Admission of issuance of a cheque attracts the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the accused must rebut that presumption with acceptable material to displace liability for a legally enforceable debt. On the facts noted, dishonour for closure of account and notice returned unclaimed were treated as sufficient to bring the matter within the cheque-dishonour framework, and the conviction under Section 138 was sustained. The sentence of imprisonment was, however, reconsidered on limited personal circumstances and reduced from one year simple imprisonment to three months simple imprisonment, while compensation was maintained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:39:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627897" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 506 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400751</link>
      <description>Admission of issuance of a cheque attracts the statutory presumption under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and the accused must rebut that presumption with acceptable material to displace liability for a legally enforceable debt. On the facts noted, dishonour for closure of account and notice returned unclaimed were treated as sufficient to bring the matter within the cheque-dishonour framework, and the conviction under Section 138 was sustained. The sentence of imprisonment was, however, reconsidered on limited personal circumstances and reduced from one year simple imprisonment to three months simple imprisonment, while compensation was maintained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400751</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>