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

2000 Supreme(SC) 503

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

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