SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1962 Supreme(Mad) 290

T.K.TUKOL
Madiah – Appellant
Versus
State of Mysore – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C. B. Srinivasa Rau, Advocate for petitioner.
The Government Pleader for respondent.

Order.-

This is a petition for setting aside the order of dismissal of Criminal Revision Petition No. 337 of 1962, passed by this Court on 4th September, 1962. When that petition had been fixed for hearing on the aforesaid date, the Advocate for the petitioner was absent and he had not complied with the objections raised by the Office with regard to the deficit Court-fee. The application was accordingly rejected on the ground that the Advocate was absent and that there was no compliance with the objections.

In the present petition, the learned Government Pleader has raised an objection that this Court has no power to review the former order of dismissal and that under the Rules framed by this High Court, the matter should go before a Division Bench. In support of this contention, he has placed reliance on the provisions of sections 9 and 10 of the Mysore High Court Act, 1961 (Mysore Act V of 1962), and contended that in view of the fact that clause (v) of section 10 expressly reserves “all other matters not expressly provided for in this Act, or any other law for the time being in force” to a Bench of two Judges, this Court constituted of a single Judge, would not have the power to s


















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top