<?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>2021 (6) TMI 991 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409095</link>
    <description>Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was applied purposively to curb delay in cheque dishonour appeals and secure payment pending appeal. The Gujarat HC held that the appellate court may direct deposit of not less than twenty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court, and that the statutory reference is to the trial court&#039;s award rather than the disputed cheque amount. The non obstante clause was held to override the general position under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Because the trial court had awarded compensation, that figure formed the correct basis for deposit, and the request for enhancement beyond twenty per cent was rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2021 09:59:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648122" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (6) TMI 991 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409095</link>
      <description>Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act was applied purposively to curb delay in cheque dishonour appeals and secure payment pending appeal. The Gujarat HC held that the appellate court may direct deposit of not less than twenty per cent of the fine or compensation awarded by the trial court, and that the statutory reference is to the trial court&#039;s award rather than the disputed cheque amount. The non obstante clause was held to override the general position under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Because the trial court had awarded compensation, that figure formed the correct basis for deposit, and the request for enhancement beyond twenty per cent was rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Mar 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409095</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>