<?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>2024 (8) TMI 588 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756884</link>
    <description>In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, issuance of notice to the correct address by registered post attracts a presumption of service under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and Section 114 of the Evidence Act unless rebutted. The complaint is not premature merely because it was filed within one month of dispatch of notice; the complainant need not mechanically wait for service to be affirmatively proved at filing stage. Specific averments of actual service or deliberate evasion are also not mandatory for maintainability, because service is a matter of evidence and the drawer may rebut the presumption during trial. The appellate acquittal was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:23:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=763747" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 588 - JHARKHAND HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756884</link>
      <description>In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, issuance of notice to the correct address by registered post attracts a presumption of service under Section 27 of the General Clauses Act and Section 114 of the Evidence Act unless rebutted. The complaint is not premature merely because it was filed within one month of dispatch of notice; the complainant need not mechanically wait for service to be affirmatively proved at filing stage. Specific averments of actual service or deliberate evasion are also not mandatory for maintainability, because service is a matter of evidence and the drawer may rebut the presumption during trial. The appellate acquittal was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756884</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>