https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403069 The Court held that the Complaint was premature and not legally maintainable as it was filed before the expiry of the statutory 15-day period from the date of refusal of the demand notice, as required under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court found the lower appellate court's findings on the date of refusal to be unsupported by evidence and declared them perverse. Consequently, both lower court judgments were set aside, the petitioner was acquitted, and discharged from liability. The Complainant was given the liberty to file a fresh Complaint in compliance with the law. en-us Tue, 12 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 19 Jan 2021 09:47:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403069 The Court held that the Complaint was premature and not legally maintainable as it was filed before the expiry of the statutory 15-day period from the date of refusal of the demand notice, as required under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court found the lower appellate court's findings on the date of refusal to be unsupported by evidence and declared them perverse. Consequently, both lower court judgments were set aside, the petitioner was acquitted, and discharged from liability. The Complainant was given the liberty to file a fresh Complaint in compliance with the law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 12 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403069