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

G.RAJASURIA
Kaliannan – Appellant
Versus
Rajini Jeyan – Respondent


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

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 dat

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