<?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 (1) TMI 1482 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460973</link>
    <description>A commercial dispute arising from a supply agreement with mediation and arbitration clauses did not disclose the essential ingredients of cheating or criminal breach of trust. The admitted materials showed a contractual claim-and-counterclaim over performance, but no dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction and no entrustment or dishonest misappropriation. Mere non-supply of goods or non-return of money was insufficient to sustain prosecution under the penal provisions. The criminal proceedings under Sections 406, 408 and 420 IPC were therefore quashed, and the parties were left to pursue the dispute in the agreed arbitral forum.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 13:52:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=804020" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (1) TMI 1482 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460973</link>
      <description>A commercial dispute arising from a supply agreement with mediation and arbitration clauses did not disclose the essential ingredients of cheating or criminal breach of trust. The admitted materials showed a contractual claim-and-counterclaim over performance, but no dishonest intention at the inception of the transaction and no entrustment or dishonest misappropriation. Mere non-supply of goods or non-return of money was insufficient to sustain prosecution under the penal provisions. The criminal proceedings under Sections 406, 408 and 420 IPC were therefore quashed, and the parties were left to pursue the dispute in the agreed arbitral forum.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jan 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460973</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>