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

2009 Supreme(Mad) 2081

High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G. RAJASURIA
Kaliannan
Versus
Rajini Jeyan
Crl.R.C.No.333 of 2007
Decided on: 03-07-2009

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:B. Vasudevan, Advocate. For the Respondent:V. Rajamohan, Advocate.

The court has the discretion to grant one more opportunity to pay the process fee, subject to specific conditions, despite acknowledging laches on the part of the petitioner.

Headnote:

Process Fee - Criminal Revision Case - The court allowed the revision petitioner one more opportunity to pay the process fee and proceed with the matter, subject to certain conditions.

Fact of the Case:

The revision petitioner filed a complaint for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The Magistrate dismissed the complaint due to non-payment of process fee within the stipulated time.

Finding of the Court:

The court acknowledged the laches on the part of the revision petitioner in paying the process fee but granted one more opportunity to pay the fee, subject to specific conditions.

Issues: Non-payment of process fee within stipulated time, seeking one more opportunity to pay the fee.

Ratio Decidendi: The court decided to allow the revision petitioner one more opportunity to pay the process fee and proceed with the matter, subject to the condition of depositing a sum to the District Legal Aid Committee and paying the process fee within a specified time period.

Final Decision: The criminal revision case was ordered in favor of the revision petitioner, allowing one more opportunity to pay the process fee, subject to specific conditions.

Judgment :

Animadverting upon the order dated 111. 2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal, in C.C.No.145 of 2006., this criminal revision case is focussed.

2. A resume of facts, which are absolutely necessary and germane for the disposal of this criminal revision case would run thus:

The revision petitioner herein filed the complaint for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act as against the accused before the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal, who took cognizance of the same and ordered issuance of summons to the accused. However, unfortunately, the process fee was not paid within the stipulated time. Hence, the Magistrate dismissed the complaint. Whereupon, this revision has been filed, virtually seeking one more opportunity to pay the process fee and proceed with the matter.

3. Heard both sides.

4. Undoubtedly there are laches on the part of the revision petitioner/complainant in paying the process fee. However, I would like to give one more opportunity to the petitioner, subject to the condition that he shall deposit a sum of Rs.200/-(two hundred) to the District Legal Aid Committee, Namakkal, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and within the same time, he shall also pay the process fee before the Court. If there is any default, this order shall not come into operation. The criminal revision case is ordered accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top