Statutory demand notice under the Negotiable Instruments Act is satisfied by timely despatch, not actual receipt within thirty days.

For compliance with proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the controlling act is the giving of notice within thirty days of receipt of bank information, and not the drawer's actual receipt within that period. The statute distinguishes between the act of issuing the demand notice and the later receipt of that notice, and Section 94 recognises notice by post, implying a permissible gap between dispatch and delivery. Accordingly, timely despatch of the statutory demand notice satisfies proviso (b) even if the drawer receives it later.

---

---

Issues: Whether, for compliance with proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the statutory demand notice must be received by the drawer within thirty days of receipt of bank information, or whether it is sufficient if the notice is despatched within that period.

Analysis: The expression "giving a notice in writing" in proviso (b) is distinct from receipt of notice in proviso (c). Section 94 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 recognises notice by post, and the statute itself contemplates a gap between dispatch and receipt. The language of proviso (b) focuses on the act of giving notice within thirty days, while proviso (c) separately fixes the drawer's time to pay from the date of receipt. On that scheme, the controlling act for proviso (b) is despatch of the notice within thirty days, not its actual receipt within that period.

Conclusion: It is sufficient compliance with proviso (b) to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 if the demand notice is despatched within thirty days, even if it is received by the drawer later.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute uses different language for "giving" notice and for "receipt" of notice, and notice is lawfully sent by post, timely despatch within the prescribed period satisfies the requirement of giving notice.

---