<?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 (4) TMI 1029 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421363</link>
    <description>The appellate court allowed the appeal, setting aside the trial court&#039;s judgment in favor of the plaintiff. It was held that the plaintiff failed to prove the passing of consideration for the promissory notes and that the defendants successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As a result, the defendants were not liable to pay the suit amounts from the deceased&#039;s estate, and no costs were awarded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 23 Apr 2022 08:32:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=676861" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (4) TMI 1029 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421363</link>
      <description>The appellate court allowed the appeal, setting aside the trial court&#039;s judgment in favor of the plaintiff. It was held that the plaintiff failed to prove the passing of consideration for the promissory notes and that the defendants successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 118 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As a result, the defendants were not liable to pay the suit amounts from the deceased&#039;s estate, and no costs were awarded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=421363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>