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

2007 Supreme(Mad) 2857

G.RAJASURIA
Vijayakanth – Appellant
Versus
P. Mariammal – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Petitioner:A. Shivaji, Advocate. For the Respondent:K. Vinayagam, Advocate.

Judgment :-

This petition has been filed to call for the records in C.C.No.207 of 2006 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputtur and quash the same.

2. Heard both sides.

.3. The facts giving rise to the filing of this petition as stood exposited from the records could be portrayed and parodied thus:

.The case in C.C.No.207 of 2006 emerged on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Srivilliputtur, consequent upon the complaint lodged by Mariammal, the respondent/complainant through his power agent for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 406 read with Section 34 I.P.C as against A.1, L.K.Sudeesh and A.2, Vijayakanth, the petitioner herein.

.4. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with, the method and manner in which cognizance has been taken, the petitioner/A.2 has filed this petition on the main ground that he had nothing to do with the alleged contract or promise which allegedly emerged between A.1 and the complainant concerned; the Central Board of Film Certificate relating to the film "Narasimma would demonstrate that the applicant for obtaining such certificates, was one Ms.Captain Cine Creations and the Producer was L.K.Sudeesh; t

















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