<?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>2026 (7) TMI 1930 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796044</link>
    <description>An acquittal in cheque-dishonour proceedings does not, by itself, create issue estoppel or res judicata against a civil money claim, because criminal guilt and civil liability are assessed under different standards of proof. Where cheque execution is specifically denied, proof of the drawer&#039;s signature alone is insufficient to trigger presumptions of consideration and liability. The claimant must first establish voluntary execution and delivery of the cheque as an operative instrument, supported by reliable evidence of the underlying transaction. Material inconsistencies concerning payment, completion, or delivery may prevent those presumptions from arising.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Jul 2026 08:27:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=914552" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 1930 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796044</link>
      <description>An acquittal in cheque-dishonour proceedings does not, by itself, create issue estoppel or res judicata against a civil money claim, because criminal guilt and civil liability are assessed under different standards of proof. Where cheque execution is specifically denied, proof of the drawer&#039;s signature alone is insufficient to trigger presumptions of consideration and liability. The claimant must first establish voluntary execution and delivery of the cheque as an operative instrument, supported by reliable evidence of the underlying transaction. Material inconsistencies concerning payment, completion, or delivery may prevent those presumptions from arising.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>