https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250658 The Supreme Court held that the handwritten note sent by the appellant constituted valid 'notice' under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court emphasized the discretion to condone delay under Section 142(b) to enable genuine litigants to pursue cases. The High Court erred in not allowing the appellant to seek condonation of delay. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled that the High Court should have remanded the matter to the Trial Court instead of quashing the proceedings based solely on limitation grounds. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and reinstated the criminal proceedings before the Trial Court, permitting the appellant to apply for condonation of delay. en-us Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Apr 2022 11:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250658 The Supreme Court held that the handwritten note sent by the appellant constituted valid 'notice' under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Court emphasized the discretion to condone delay under Section 142(b) to enable genuine litigants to pursue cases. The High Court erred in not allowing the appellant to seek condonation of delay. Additionally, the Supreme Court ruled that the High Court should have remanded the matter to the Trial Court instead of quashing the proceedings based solely on limitation grounds. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and reinstated the criminal proceedings before the Trial Court, permitting the appellant to apply for condonation of delay. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 11 Aug 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250658