https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457191 A special limitation provision requiring one month's prior notice and suit within six months was applied cumulatively, so failure to satisfy either condition defeated maintainability. A letter sent before suit was held not to be a valid statutory notice because it did not clearly constitute notice of intended litigation, and the claim was also time-barred from the date the cause of action accrued. The partial decree on admission for an admitted amount did not amount to waiver of limitation or notice objections for the disputed balance, especially without proper pleading or proof. The SC also upheld the special limitation regime as constitutionally valid under Articles 14 and 19. en-us Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Dec 2025 15:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457191 A special limitation provision requiring one month's prior notice and suit within six months was applied cumulatively, so failure to satisfy either condition defeated maintainability. A letter sent before suit was held not to be a valid statutory notice because it did not clearly constitute notice of intended litigation, and the claim was also time-barred from the date the cause of action accrued. The partial decree on admission for an admitted amount did not amount to waiver of limitation or notice objections for the disputed balance, especially without proper pleading or proof. The SC also upheld the special limitation regime as constitutionally valid under Articles 14 and 19. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 31 Mar 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=457191