<?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 statutory demand notice by registered 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. A denial of receipt after the acknowledgment card is produced must be proved by the accused. The notes further state that the complainant&#039;s unrebutted evidence of the loan source, coupled with admitted prior dealings and cheque issuance, supported presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act. As the accused did not prove discharge of liability, the acquittal was described as unsustainable and conviction for cheque dishonour followed.</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 statutory demand notice by registered 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. A denial of receipt after the acknowledgment card is produced must be proved by the accused. The notes further state that the complainant&#039;s unrebutted evidence of the loan source, coupled with admitted prior dealings and cheque issuance, supported presumptions of consideration and liability under the Negotiable Instruments Act. As the accused did not prove discharge of liability, the acquittal was described as unsustainable and conviction for cheque dishonour followed.</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>