DORAISWAMY RAJU, A. S. ANAND, R. C. LAHOTI
C. Nagaraj – Appellant
Versus
A. Sathyanarayana – Respondent
(1) LEAVE granted.
(2) THIS case revolves around the conviction of the Appellant recorded by the Courts below for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. It appears that while the judgment was under signatures of the learned Single Judge of the High Court, the parties compromised the matter and submitted a joint memo of settlement. The learned Single Judge, however, declined to take notice of the same on the ground that the order had been dictated in open Court and he could not review it. The view taken by the learned Single Judge is unexceptionable.
(3) IN this court also, a compromise deed has been filed. Learned counsel for the respondent, who appears on caveat, submits that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and that the entire amount which was due to the respondent has since been received by him. Learned counsel for the parties submits that the factum of compromise be taken on record and appropriate orders made.
(4) IN view of the facts and circumstances, as noticed above, while maintaining the conviction of the Appellant, as recorded by the courts below, we reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by h
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.