<?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>2001 (2) TMI 1052 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295014</link>
    <description>A complaint arising from a lease transaction will not support charges of cheating or criminal breach of trust unless it alleges fraudulent or dishonest intention at the inception and dishonest inducement to part with property. A mere failure to perform contractual obligations, without willful misrepresentation or deception at the time of the agreement, remains a civil dispute. Where the complaint, even on its face, does not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences and appears to be used to pressure a party in a predominantly civil matter, the court may exercise inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice; the quashing of proceedings was upheld on that basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 May 2021 12:37:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=644342" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (2) TMI 1052 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295014</link>
      <description>A complaint arising from a lease transaction will not support charges of cheating or criminal breach of trust unless it alleges fraudulent or dishonest intention at the inception and dishonest inducement to part with property. A mere failure to perform contractual obligations, without willful misrepresentation or deception at the time of the agreement, remains a civil dispute. Where the complaint, even on its face, does not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences and appears to be used to pressure a party in a predominantly civil matter, the court may exercise inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice; the quashing of proceedings was upheld on that basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 16 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295014</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>