<?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>2010 (12) TMI 1332 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298881</link>
    <description>The High Court allowed the criminal revisions, setting aside the lower courts&#039; judgments. It held that without due endorsement and proof of consideration, the complainant failed to establish holder in due course status. The complaints were rejected, and the accused were directed to be refunded the fine paid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Apr 2023 12:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662025" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1332 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298881</link>
      <description>The High Court allowed the criminal revisions, setting aside the lower courts&#039; judgments. It held that without due endorsement and proof of consideration, the complainant failed to establish holder in due course status. The complaints were rejected, and the accused were directed to be refunded the fine paid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298881</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>