<?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 (8) TMI 147 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796274</link>
    <description>Dispatch of a written demand notice by post to the accused&#039;s correct address raises a presumption of issuance under the General Clauses Act; actual service is not required for cheque-dishonour liability. Once the acknowledgment card is tendered, the accused must substantiate denial of receipt, including by postman evidence where appropriate. Signature comparison alone does not prove that notice was not issued. Unrebutted evidence of the loan&#039;s source, coupled with admitted prior dealings and issuance of the cheque as security, supports the statutory presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Failure to prove discharge of the debt sustains conviction for cheque dishonour.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2026 08:39:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=915209" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (8) TMI 147 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796274</link>
      <description>Dispatch of a written demand notice by post to the accused&#039;s correct address raises a presumption of issuance under the General Clauses Act; actual service is not required for cheque-dishonour liability. Once the acknowledgment card is tendered, the accused must substantiate denial of receipt, including by postman evidence where appropriate. Signature comparison alone does not prove that notice was not issued. Unrebutted evidence of the loan&#039;s source, coupled with admitted prior dealings and issuance of the cheque as security, supports the statutory presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Failure to prove discharge of the debt sustains conviction for cheque dishonour.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=796274</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>