<?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>2022 (1) TMI 9 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416544</link>
    <description>Dishonour of a cheque due to incomplete or mismatched signatures can attract liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court noted that the provision has been interpreted broadly to advance its purpose and has already been applied beyond insufficiency of funds, including stop-payment and account-closed situations. Relying on Laxmi Dyechem, it held that a return for incomplete signatures, no image, or signature mismatch may still fall within Section 138, and treated the earlier contrary view in Vinod Tanna as not followed. The challenge to the complaint and process order therefore failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Jan 2022 12:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665854" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 9 - JAMMU AND KASHMIR HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416544</link>
      <description>Dishonour of a cheque due to incomplete or mismatched signatures can attract liability under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court noted that the provision has been interpreted broadly to advance its purpose and has already been applied beyond insufficiency of funds, including stop-payment and account-closed situations. Relying on Laxmi Dyechem, it held that a return for incomplete signatures, no image, or signature mismatch may still fall within Section 138, and treated the earlier contrary view in Vinod Tanna as not followed. The challenge to the complaint and process order therefore failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Dec 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=416544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>