<?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>2006 (2) TMI 720 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300586</link>
    <description>The revision petition was allowed, setting aside the acquittal of the respondent and restoring the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The sentence was modified to a fine with a default provision, providing relief to the respondent while upholding the conviction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2022 11:15:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=670142" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (2) TMI 720 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300586</link>
      <description>The revision petition was allowed, setting aside the acquittal of the respondent and restoring the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The sentence was modified to a fine with a default provision, providing relief to the respondent while upholding the conviction.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=300586</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>