<?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 (11) TMI 88 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429664</link>
    <description>In cheque dishonour proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, an admitted cheque signature attracts the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable liability. Those presumptions stand unless the accused raises a probable defence; here, no rebuttal evidence was produced, so guilt was sustained. Service of notice was also treated as established through the presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. Concurrent findings were not interfered with in revision absent perversity, and the custodial sentence was modified to a compensation-oriented monetary direction.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2022 11:47:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=694671" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 88 - TELANGANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429664</link>
      <description>In cheque dishonour proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, an admitted cheque signature attracts the presumptions under Sections 118 and 139 that the cheque was issued for consideration and in discharge of a legally enforceable liability. Those presumptions stand unless the accused raises a probable defence; here, no rebuttal evidence was produced, so guilt was sustained. Service of notice was also treated as established through the presumption under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act. Concurrent findings were not interfered with in revision absent perversity, and the custodial sentence was modified to a compensation-oriented monetary direction.</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=429664</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>