<?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 (12) TMI 558 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431441</link>
    <description>The High Court held that the legal notice demanding the entire outstanding amount instead of the specific cheque amount did not comply with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As a result, the court quashed the criminal complaint and the impugned order, disposing of the petition and addressing all pending applications accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2022 09:05:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=698523" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 558 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431441</link>
      <description>The High Court held that the legal notice demanding the entire outstanding amount instead of the specific cheque amount did not comply with Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. As a result, the court quashed the criminal complaint and the impugned order, disposing of the petition and addressing all pending applications accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431441</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>