https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450492 Repeated assurances, acknowledgements of liability, a subsequent memorandum of understanding and related correspondence can justify condonation of delay in filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 where they support the complainant's claim of forbearance. Length of delay is not decisive by itself; the sufficiency of the cause shown and the surrounding conduct remain central. Where the first court has exercised discretion to condone delay, interference by a superior court is ordinarily unwarranted unless that discretion is arbitrary, perverse or untenable. On the stated facts, the delay was properly condoned and no basis existed to disturb the concurrent exercise of discretion. en-us Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Mar 2024 21:04:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450492 Repeated assurances, acknowledgements of liability, a subsequent memorandum of understanding and related correspondence can justify condonation of delay in filing a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 where they support the complainant's claim of forbearance. Length of delay is not decisive by itself; the sufficiency of the cause shown and the surrounding conduct remain central. Where the first court has exercised discretion to condone delay, interference by a superior court is ordinarily unwarranted unless that discretion is arbitrary, perverse or untenable. On the stated facts, the delay was properly condoned and no basis existed to disturb the concurrent exercise of discretion. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 04 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450492