dishonour of cheque
gopal narain mehrotra
(Querist) 30 September 2009
This query is : Resolved
information for bouncing of cheque received by the party on 29.09.2000 and notice of demand should be given within 15 days from 29.09.2000, but notice dated 15.10.2000, dispatched on 22.10.2000 by registered post i,e, after 15 days, registered notice was undelivered to the party, now the question is period of 15 days will be count from the date written on the notice or from the date of dispatch receipt by registered post of notice. please also give the rulings or citations
PJANARDHANA REDDY
(Expert) 30 September 2009
THE DISPATCH COVER RETURN DATE OF POST STAMP ON COVER , THEN AFTER 15 DAYS INITIATE FILING CASE.
Adinath@Avinash Patil
(Expert) 01 October 2009
You have issued/dispatched notice on 22/10/2000.i.e.before amendment of n.i.Act.hence i think your notice is not within limitation of 15 days.Hence you are not within the ingrediants of n.i.act of u/s 138.The amendment is not retrospectve.your case is time barred.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 01 October 2009
From the date of receipt of unclaimed notice.
The amendment to the NI Act is not retrospective effect. So I agree with Sir Adinath.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 01 October 2009
The opinion of Adinath is perfect. Notice was despatched belatedly hence no scope of invoking the provisions of section 138 NI act.
PJANARDHANA REDDY
(Expert) 01 October 2009
MR. GOPAL JI ,I THOUGHT THE DATE U MENTIONED R FOR ILLUSTRATION, IF THE THE CAUSE OF ACTION WAS ON THOSE DATES, NO NI ACT 138 ATTRACTS ,The amendment is not introspective.your case is time barred.
Jithendra.H.J
(Expert) 01 October 2009
certainly the complaint is not maintaianble as stated by Mr.Adinath patil.
Refer: Rajeev Indani Vs Veerendra Heggade, ILR 2001 Kar 4987.
the complainant should have filed a money suit within 3 years, even that right is also barred now.
Sachin Bhatia
(Expert) 01 October 2009
The notice is not within limitation therefore the complaint is not maintainable.
Bhushan V. Kale
(Expert) 02 October 2009
I agree with Mr. Adinath Patil sir.
