Subsequent condonation cures prior cognizance irregularity in a belated Negotiable Instruments Act complaint

Under the Negotiable Instruments Act, delay in filing a complaint does not invalidate cognizance merely because the condonation order is passed later. Section 142(1)(b) bars belated complaints, but its proviso permits cognizance once sufficient cause for delay is shown and the delay is formally condoned. The Court held that the timing of the condonation application is not decisive and that subsequent condonation cures the earlier procedural defect. Prior cognizance on a delayed complaint is therefore treated as a curable irregularity, absent demonstrated prejudice.

---

---

Issues: Whether cognizance taken on a complaint filed beyond the prescribed period under the Negotiable Instruments Act is vitiated if the delay is condoned subsequently and whether such defect is only a curable irregularity.

Analysis: Section 142(1)(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act bars cognizance of a complaint filed beyond the prescribed period, but its proviso empowers the Court to take cognizance if the complainant shows sufficient cause for the delay. The timing of the application for condonation is not ; what matters is that the Court ultimately records satisfaction regarding sufficient cause and condones the delay. Once delay is condoned, the earlier act of taking cognizance on a belated complaint does not by itself vitiate the proceedings and is treated as a curable irregularity. The later condonation cures the defect, and no prejudice is shown merely because cognizance was taken before the formal condonation order.

Conclusion: The objection to cognizance on the ground that delay was condoned after cognizance was taken was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed, and the proceedings founded on the complaint were allowed to continue after the delay in filing the complaint had been condoned.

Ratio Decidendi: In a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act, subsequent condonation of delay under the proviso to Section 142(1)(b) cures the irregularity of prior cognizance, and such prior cognizance is not invalidated solely for being taken before formal condonation.

---