<?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 (9) TMI 383 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427438</link>
    <description>In cheque dishonour prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, compensation should normally be assessed up to twice the cheque amount, but only on a practical and fact-sensitive basis that reflects restitution and the circumstances of the case. Here, the complaint arose from a cheque issued towards repayment of lease-related dues; the trial court convicted the accused, and the appellate court affirmed conviction while substantially increasing the fine. The revisional challenge sought still further enhancement, but the court found no sufficient ground to interfere further in exercise of inherent powers, as the appellate enhancement was already substantial.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Sep 2022 07:03:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=690185" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 383 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427438</link>
      <description>In cheque dishonour prosecutions under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, compensation should normally be assessed up to twice the cheque amount, but only on a practical and fact-sensitive basis that reflects restitution and the circumstances of the case. Here, the complaint arose from a cheque issued towards repayment of lease-related dues; the trial court convicted the accused, and the appellate court affirmed conviction while substantially increasing the fine. The revisional challenge sought still further enhancement, but the court found no sufficient ground to interfere further in exercise of inherent powers, as the appellate enhancement was already substantial.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427438</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>