<?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>2025 (6) TMI 837 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772724</link>
    <description>Company complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act are maintainable when the payee company acts through a Managing Director empowered by its Articles of Association and authorised by the Board to institute proceedings. Proof of cheque execution, supported by the underlying agreement, ledger extracts, confirmation letter and statutory notices, raises the presumption of legally enforceable debt or liability. The accused must rebut that presumption on a preponderance of probabilities; failure to produce sufficient contrary material sustains liability. Revisional interference with concurrent findings is unavailable unless they are perverse, illegal, grossly erroneous or unsupported by material. The convictions and sentences were sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2025 08:41:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=828826" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (6) TMI 837 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772724</link>
      <description>Company complaints under the Negotiable Instruments Act are maintainable when the payee company acts through a Managing Director empowered by its Articles of Association and authorised by the Board to institute proceedings. Proof of cheque execution, supported by the underlying agreement, ledger extracts, confirmation letter and statutory notices, raises the presumption of legally enforceable debt or liability. The accused must rebut that presumption on a preponderance of probabilities; failure to produce sufficient contrary material sustains liability. Revisional interference with concurrent findings is unavailable unless they are perverse, illegal, grossly erroneous or unsupported by material. The convictions and sentences were sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772724</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>