<?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>2014 (10) TMI 1053 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300001</link>
    <description>A promissory note supported by an earlier debt remained enforceable where the makers admitted their signatures but denied consideration and execution. Past consideration was sufficient for a fresh promise under the Contract Act, and a signed instrument could be completed within the stamp value under Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Once signature was admitted, the presumption of consideration under Section 118 arose in favour of the holder. The defendants failed to produce cogent rebuttal evidence, and the materials relied on did not displace the statutory presumption or make the transaction improbable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2022 09:46:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666521" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (10) TMI 1053 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300001</link>
      <description>A promissory note supported by an earlier debt remained enforceable where the makers admitted their signatures but denied consideration and execution. Past consideration was sufficient for a fresh promise under the Contract Act, and a signed instrument could be completed within the stamp value under Section 20 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Once signature was admitted, the presumption of consideration under Section 118 arose in favour of the holder. The defendants failed to produce cogent rebuttal evidence, and the materials relied on did not displace the statutory presumption or make the transaction improbable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300001</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>