https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193468 The court held that the plea of limitation is not available to the accused in a case under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was determined that the issuance of a cheque creates a legally enforceable liability, and even if the limitation for recovery had expired, the promise made in writing (cheque) remains enforceable under the Indian Contract Act. The court clarified that the presumption under section 139 of the Act is rebuttable, and overruled the view that the penal provision is not applicable if the cheque was issued for a debt barred by limitation. The revision petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 75,000 to the respondent-complainant. en-us Wed, 05 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 31 Jul 2017 10:29:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193468 The court held that the plea of limitation is not available to the accused in a case under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It was determined that the issuance of a cheque creates a legally enforceable liability, and even if the limitation for recovery had expired, the promise made in writing (cheque) remains enforceable under the Indian Contract Act. The court clarified that the presumption under section 139 of the Act is rebuttable, and overruled the view that the penal provision is not applicable if the cheque was issued for a debt barred by limitation. The revision petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to pay Rs. 75,000 to the respondent-complainant. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 05 Mar 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193468