<?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 (9) TMI 865 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778376</link>
    <description>A revision petition against an order directing deposit under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable because such an order is not purely interlocutory where compliance may effectively curtail the right of appeal. The Court also explained that waiver of the statutory deposit is available only in rare and exceptional cases, such as deprivation of appellate rights or patent perversity in the conviction order, and not after a detailed reappraisal of evidence at the Section 148 stage. As the trial court had considered the rival contentions and the plea of financial hardship was unsubstantiated, no waiver was granted and the deposit direction was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 11:56:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850746" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 865 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778376</link>
      <description>A revision petition against an order directing deposit under Section 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable because such an order is not purely interlocutory where compliance may effectively curtail the right of appeal. The Court also explained that waiver of the statutory deposit is available only in rare and exceptional cases, such as deprivation of appellate rights or patent perversity in the conviction order, and not after a detailed reappraisal of evidence at the Section 148 stage. As the trial court had considered the rival contentions and the plea of financial hardship was unsubstantiated, no waiver was granted and the deposit direction was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778376</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>