https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285454 An amendment inserting a proviso to Section 142(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, allowing extension of limitation on sufficient cause, was held to operate prospectively because it did not express or imply retrospective effect. Statutes affecting substantive rights are presumed prospective unless the legislature clearly indicates otherwise. Since the complaint had been filed before the amendment came into force and no basis was pleaded to apply the later provision, the earlier complaint could not be saved by the amendment, and the proceedings were quashed. en-us Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 21 May 2024 16:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285454 An amendment inserting a proviso to Section 142(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, allowing extension of limitation on sufficient cause, was held to operate prospectively because it did not express or imply retrospective effect. Statutes affecting substantive rights are presumed prospective unless the legislature clearly indicates otherwise. Since the complaint had been filed before the amendment came into force and no basis was pleaded to apply the later provision, the earlier complaint could not be saved by the amendment, and the proceedings were quashed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 12 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285454