<?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 (10) TMI 862 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800919</link>
    <description>Issuance of a cheque towards a time-barred debt is not prohibited and may constitute an acknowledgment of liability that revives the debt. Where the transaction, cheque execution, dishonour, statutory demand notice, and non-payment are established, the underlying debt is not rendered unenforceable solely because it was previously barred by limitation. Treating the time-barred nature of the original debt as an absolute bar to cheque dishonour prosecution is therefore incorrect.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2026 06:17:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=929730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 862 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800919</link>
      <description>Issuance of a cheque towards a time-barred debt is not prohibited and may constitute an acknowledgment of liability that revives the debt. Where the transaction, cheque execution, dishonour, statutory demand notice, and non-payment are established, the underlying debt is not rendered unenforceable solely because it was previously barred by limitation. Treating the time-barred nature of the original debt as an absolute bar to cheque dishonour prosecution is therefore incorrect.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800919</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>