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

2024 Supreme(SC) 521

B. V. NAGARATHNA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH
K. Ramesh – Appellant
Versus
K. Kothandaraman – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. V. Puneedhan, Adv., Mr. Selvam P., Adv., Mr. Sameer Aslam, Adv., Mr. S. Gowthaman, AOR.

ORDER :

Leave granted.

2. Notice in the appeal was issued on 15.04.2019. Dasti service, in addition, was permitted. The learned Registrar has noted by his order dated 24.07.2019 that service of notice qua the sole respondent is complete but no one has entered appearance on his behalf. Even as per the latest Office Report dated 03.01.2024, it is noted that the respondent was served on 07.05.2019, but there is no representation on behalf of the respondent. In the circumstances, we have heard learned counsel for the appellant.

3. The appellant is aggrieved by the order dated 23.11.2018 passed by the Madras High Court in Crl. R.C. No.1212 of 2018 by which the Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the order dated 27.08.2018 in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No.1456 of 2018 filed in C.C. No.2767/2018 pending trial before the 20th Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore at Allikulam has been set aside.

4. Learned counsel for the appellant drew our attention to the latest judgment of this Court in the case of Bir Singh vs. Mukesh Kumar, (2019) 4 SCC 197 (‘Bir Singh’) and contended that having regard to Section 118 read wi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

K. Sivakumar, Rep. by his Power Agent Mr. R. Haneesh vs V. Shanmugasundram - 2026 0 Supreme(Mad) 126: This case is cited as a precedent ("K.Ramesh vs. ... K.Kothandaraman reported in 2024 0 Supreme (SC) 5216"), indicating it has been followed or relied upon in a subsequent Supreme Court decision. The citation structure suggests positive treatment as binding or relevant authority.

Bir Singh VS Mukesh Kumar - 2019 3 Supreme 129: No keywords or phrases (e.g., followed, distinguished, overruled) appear in the provided text describing this case. The entry consists solely of doctrinal summaries (e.g., "Presumption u/s 139 is a presumption of law," "fine should uniformly levied up to twice the cheque amount") with no indication of subsequent judicial treatment.

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