https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424860 The Bombay HC held that the power to award interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act is discretionary, not mandatory, because the provision uses permissive language, operates at the pre-conviction stage, and is capped by statute. The Court distinguished Section 143-A from post-conviction Section 148 and noted that the rebuttable presumption under Section 139 and possible failure at the threshold also support discretion. It further held that reasons must be recorded when interim compensation is awarded and its quantum fixed, to show application of mind and justify the amount. The orders granting interim compensation were set aside and the applications remitted for fresh consideration. en-us Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Jul 2022 08:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424860 The Bombay HC held that the power to award interim compensation under Section 143-A of the Negotiable Instruments Act is discretionary, not mandatory, because the provision uses permissive language, operates at the pre-conviction stage, and is capped by statute. The Court distinguished Section 143-A from post-conviction Section 148 and noted that the rebuttable presumption under Section 139 and possible failure at the threshold also support discretion. It further held that reasons must be recorded when interim compensation is awarded and its quantum fixed, to show application of mind and justify the amount. The orders granting interim compensation were set aside and the applications remitted for fresh consideration. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 07 Jul 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=424860