Section 98: When, notice of dishonor is unnecessary

Negotiable Instruments Act • Official Statutory Text & Practice Guide

Statutory Regulation
Legal Standard
Competent Court / Tribunal
Act 1881

Legal Commentary & Landmark Judgments: Section 98

Section 98 enumerates the statutory circumstances where notice of dishonour is completely unnecessary and dispensed with, protecting holders from technical dismissals.

  • Waiver of Notice: Dispensed with when the party entitled to notice explicitly or implicitly waives it (e.g., 'notice of dishonour waived').
  • Drawer Suffering No Damage / No Funds: Dispensed with as against the drawer if the drawer had no funds in the bank or had stopped payment (pivotal for cheque bounce).
  • Drawer as Drawee / Fictitious Party: Dispensed with when the drawer and drawee are the same person, or where the party could not after due search be found.
  • Unconditional Promise to Pay: Dispensed with if the party bound to pay promises unconditionally to pay the amount after maturity with knowledge of dishonour.
Key Landmark Precedents:
  • K. Bhaskaran v. Sankaran Vaidhyan Balan (1999) 7 SCC 510: The Supreme Court examined Section 98, holding that where the drawer issued a cheque without funds or instructed stop-payment, they suffer no damage and cannot plead absence of notice under Section 98(c).
  • Kusum Ingots & Alloys Ltd. v. Pennar Peterson Securities Ltd. (2000) 2 SCC 745: Affirmed that Section 98 principles apply to commercial instruments to prevent dishonest drawers from exploiting procedural notice technicalities.
Courtroom Practice & Strategic Litigation Guidance:

In civil suits on dishonoured cheques where a separate Section 93 notice was not issued (only the Section 138 notice was sent), plead Section 98(c): notice of dishonour was unnecessary as against the drawer because the drawer had no funds and suffered no damage.