<?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>2016 (4) TMI 1423 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302675</link>
    <description>The High Court found that the accused successfully rebutted the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, upheld by the appellate court, were set aside. The accused was acquitted, and any bail bonds were canceled. The petitioner was granted the liberty to recover any withdrawn amount by the complainant as per the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jun 2022 20:39:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=681728" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 1423 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302675</link>
      <description>The High Court found that the accused successfully rebutted the presumption under Sections 118 and 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court, upheld by the appellate court, were set aside. The accused was acquitted, and any bail bonds were canceled. The petitioner was granted the liberty to recover any withdrawn amount by the complainant as per the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Apr 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=302675</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>