9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of limitation period in Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act - Calculation of period based on British calendar month or lunar month.
Analysis: 1. The case involves a dispute between the accused and the complainant regarding the presentation of a cheque for collection, which was returned due to insufficient funds. The accused argued that the cheque was presented after the expiration of the limitation period, barring criminal prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. 2. The accused contended that the limitation period should commence from the date the cheque was drawn, excluding the date of the instrument, as per Section 9 of the General Clauses Act. The accused relied on previous judgments to support this interpretation, emphasizing that the period of limitation starts from the date mentioned in the cheque or instrument. 3. The court analyzed the provisions of Section 138 of the Act, emphasizing that the limitation period indeed begins from the date of the instrument, as established by previous Supreme Court and High Court judgments. The court cited relevant precedents to support the view that the majority opinion of judges has settled the interpretation that the limitation period commences from the date the instrument bears. 4. Another crucial aspect of the case was the calculation of the six-month limitation period prescribed in Section 138 (proviso (a)) of the Act. The court deliberated on whether the term "month" should be construed as a British calendar month or a lunar month. The court referred to Section 3(35) of the General Clauses Act, which defines a month as per the British calendar. 5. The court examined various judicial interpretations on the definition of a month in different statutes, noting the conflicting views on whether a month should be considered as a period of 30 days or a calendar month. Ultimately, the court aligned with the interpretation that a month, as per the Act, refers to a British calendar month, in agreement with decisions from the High Courts of Calcutta and Andhra Pradesh. 6. Based on the above analysis, the court concluded that the cheque in question was presented after the expiration of the limitation period, as calculated based on the British calendar month. Consequently, the court quashed the magistrate's order and dismissed the proceedings in the criminal case, ruling in favor of the accused. This detailed analysis highlights the key legal arguments, interpretations of relevant statutes, and judicial precedents considered by the court in delivering the judgment on the interpretation of the limitation period in Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.
|
