https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309363 The court found the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to be time-barred as it exceeded the one-month limitation period. The court clarified that the amendment allowing for condonation of delay did not apply in this case. The legal notice demanding payment was issued after the prescribed 15-day period, rendering it non-compliant with the Act. As a result, the petition was allowed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and the proceedings in C.C.No. 321/02 were quashed, along with the process issued against the petitioner/accused. en-us Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 28 Aug 2023 10:55:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309363 The court found the complaint filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act to be time-barred as it exceeded the one-month limitation period. The court clarified that the amendment allowing for condonation of delay did not apply in this case. The legal notice demanding payment was issued after the prescribed 15-day period, rendering it non-compliant with the Act. As a result, the petition was allowed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., and the proceedings in C.C.No. 321/02 were quashed, along with the process issued against the petitioner/accused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 16 Jul 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309363