https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308454 The court found no defense for the appellant on the merits of the case, rejecting the argument that the suit was solely based on the loan and not on dishonored cheques and bills of exchange. Additionally, the court determined that the suit was not barred under the Bombay Money Lenders Act, as the loans were advanced based on negotiable instruments and not falling within the Act's scope. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was given an extension to deposit the amount until 31.12.2014. en-us Thu, 20 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 28 Jun 2023 07:35:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308454 The court found no defense for the appellant on the merits of the case, rejecting the argument that the suit was solely based on the loan and not on dishonored cheques and bills of exchange. Additionally, the court determined that the suit was not barred under the Bombay Money Lenders Act, as the loans were advanced based on negotiable instruments and not falling within the Act's scope. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the appellant was given an extension to deposit the amount until 31.12.2014. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 20 Nov 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=308454