<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2022 (11) TMI 396 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429972</link>
    <description>A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable only after expiry of the 15-day statutory waiting period following receipt of notice, because the cause of action arises only then. A complaint filed before that period ends is premature and is not a complaint in the eye of law, so cognizance is barred under Section 142. The criminal proceedings based on such a complaint cannot be sustained and are liable to be quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Nov 2022 08:00:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695281" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 396 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429972</link>
      <description>A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is maintainable only after expiry of the 15-day statutory waiting period following receipt of notice, because the cause of action arises only then. A complaint filed before that period ends is premature and is not a complaint in the eye of law, so cognizance is barred under Section 142. The criminal proceedings based on such a complaint cannot be sustained and are liable to be quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>