<?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 (7) TMI 692 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409850</link>
    <description>A criminal complaint arising from a commercial supply dispute over laptops, discount terms, alleged non-delivery and a claimed credit-note liability was treated as substantially contractual and civil in nature. The court noted that an earlier FIR, later charge sheet proceedings and Negotiable Instruments Act proceedings had already been initiated by the petitioners against the complainant, and that the subsequent FIR was lodged belatedly in that backdrop. On the competing versions and surrounding materials, the later allegations did not prima facie inspire confidence and appeared retaliatory. The FIR was quashed as an abuse of process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Sep 2021 17:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=649953" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 692 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409850</link>
      <description>A criminal complaint arising from a commercial supply dispute over laptops, discount terms, alleged non-delivery and a claimed credit-note liability was treated as substantially contractual and civil in nature. The court noted that an earlier FIR, later charge sheet proceedings and Negotiable Instruments Act proceedings had already been initiated by the petitioners against the complainant, and that the subsequent FIR was lodged belatedly in that backdrop. On the competing versions and surrounding materials, the later allegations did not prima facie inspire confidence and appeared retaliatory. The FIR was quashed as an abuse of process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409850</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>