<?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>2019 (4) TMI 2010 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297391</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the validity of the conditional order directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, citing the recent amendment to Section 148 of the NI Act as the basis for the decision. The Court dismissed the petition, affirming the trial Court&#039;s authority to order compensation payment and suspend the sentence, requiring a minimum 20% deposit by the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Sep 2021 21:53:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=654524" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 2010 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297391</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the validity of the conditional order directing the petitioner to deposit 20% of the compensation amount, citing the recent amendment to Section 148 of the NI Act as the basis for the decision. The Court dismissed the petition, affirming the trial Court&#039;s authority to order compensation payment and suspend the sentence, requiring a minimum 20% deposit by the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297391</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>