<?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>2015 (3) TMI 1442 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458448</link>
    <description>The HC dismissed the Criminal Original Petition seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Trial Court found that the respondent successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139, and the petitioner failed to prove the cheque was issued for a legally subsisting liability. Consequently, the HC upheld the Trial Court&#039;s decision, denying the petitioner&#039;s request to appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:28:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=775975" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (3) TMI 1442 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458448</link>
      <description>The HC dismissed the Criminal Original Petition seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal of the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Trial Court found that the respondent successfully rebutted the presumption under Section 139, and the petitioner failed to prove the cheque was issued for a legally subsisting liability. Consequently, the HC upheld the Trial Court&#039;s decision, denying the petitioner&#039;s request to appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458448</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>