Limitation for cheque dishonour complaints: one cause of action arises after valid notice, and delay needs condonation.

After valid service of notice under the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the cause of action arises only once if payment is not made within fifteen days. The complaint must then be filed within one month under Section 142(1)(b), and a delayed filing is not maintainable unless the delay is condoned on sufficient cause being shown. The text also notes that where cognizance is taken beyond that limitation period without condonation, the order cannot be sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the cognizance taken for offences under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 read with Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code was barred by limitation for failure to file the complaint within the prescribed period and in the absence of condonation of delay.

Analysis: The notice served on the drawer within the statutory period was treated as a valid notice under clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. On the drawer's failure to make payment within fifteen days of receipt of that notice, the cause of action arose only once, and the complaint had to be filed within one month under Section 142(1)(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Since the complaint was filed beyond that period and the Magistrate had not condoned the delay on being satisfied about sufficient cause, the order taking cognizance could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The cognizance order was held unsustainable and was quashed; the application was allowed.

Ratio Decidendi: After service of a valid notice under clause (b) of the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, the cause of action arises only once, and a complaint filed beyond one month under Section 142(1)(b) is not maintainable unless the delay is duly condoned for sufficient cause.

---