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

2016 Supreme(Mad) 3478

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
R. Subbiah, J.
S.V.R. Saroja and Ors. - Applicants
Versus
S.V. Matha Prasad - Respondent
A. Nos. 1156 to 1160 of 2015 in E.P. No. 48 of 1997 in C.S. No. 43 of 1962
Decided On : 16-06-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Applicants : Mr. R. Natarajn for M/s. S. Hemalatha.
For the Respondent: Mr. S. Hemanand for Mr. M. Kamalakannan.

Headnote:Criminal Procedure 1973, Sections 195(b)(ii), (iii) and 340 - Original Side Rules (Rules), Order 14, Rule 12 - It has been held in this case that there was no delay on the part of applicant-applicants had file a copy application on time, registry returned the copy application - a delay of 54 days under rule 12, order 14 of O.S. , explained with sufficient cause-therefore the application is allowed by the court

ORDER :

Mr. R. Subbiah, J.

As per the order of the Hon'ble The Chief Justice, this matter was posted before this Court for hearing under the caption 'Specially Ordered Case'.

2. Application No. 1156 of 2015 has been filed by the applicants praying to condone the delay of 54 days in preferring appeal against the order dated 17.09.2014 passed in Application No. 4969 of 2014 in E.P. No. 48 of 1997, whereby the learned Master directed the Registry to forward a criminal complaint against the applicants herein, who have been arrayed as R21 to R24 in the said application, for the alleged offences punishable under Section 466 r/w 120 IPC.

3. Application No. 1157 of 2015 has been filed by the applicants praying to permit them to file appeal against the order dated 17.09.2014 passed in Application No. 4969 of 2014 in E.P. No. 48 of 1997 by the learned Master.

4. Application No. 1158 of 2015 has been filed by the applicants praying to dispense with the production of the certified copy of the order dated 17.09.2014 in Application No. 4969 of 2014 in E.P. No. 48 of 1997, passed by the learned Master.

5. Application No. 1159 of 2015 has been filed by the applicants praying to stay the operation of the order dated 17.09.2014 in Application No. 4969 of 2014 in E.P. No. 48 of 1997, passed by the learned Master of this Court.

6. Application No. 1160 of 2015 has been filed by the applicants praying to permit them to raise additional grounds in the appeal filed against the order dated 17.09.2014 in Application No. 4969 of 2014 in E.P. No. 48 of 1997, on the file of the learned Master.

7. The respondent herein viz., S.V. Mathaprasad had filed the Application No. 4969 of 2014 under Section 340 r/w 195(b)(ii) & (iii) of Cr.P.C. It is alleged by the respondent in the said petition that the applicants herein, with the connivance of a lady clerk of this Court by name Mrs. T.R. Indira, have interpolated the Execution Petition No. 48 of 1997, by inserting their names as co-decree holders 2 to 5 and when the same came to his knowledge, he made a complaint to the Registrar on 06.03.2006 and also filed a Contempt Petition No. 54 of 2006 in SLP. No. 7447 of 2003, which was pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. While dismissing the said contempt petition, the Hon'ble Supreme Court gave liberty the respondent herein to move before the Hon'ble The Chief Justice of this Court. Pursuant to the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the petitioner has also given a complaint to the then Chief Justice of this Court on 25.09.2006 ; following the same, enquiry was ordered with regard to the tampering of records. Thereafter, the Register-Vigilance conducted an enquiry and by his report dated 31.01.2007, he held that the complaint of tampering stood proved. In the meantime, the respondent herein, who is the 2nd plaintiff in C.S. No. 43 of 1962, has filed the said Application No. 4969 of 2014 before the learned Master under Section 340 r/w 195(b)(ii) & (iii) of Cr.P.C., seeking to initiate criminal action against the applicants herein for the alleged offence punishable under Section 120(B) r/w Section 466 IPC and Section 13(1)(d)(i)& (iii) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In the said application, the impugned order dated 17.09.2014 has been passed by the learned Master, whereby the learned Master has directed the Registry to forward a criminal complaint against the applicants herein, to the competent Jurisdictional Magistrate for the alleged offence punishable under Section 466 r/w 120(b) IPC. Pursuant to the said order of the learned Master, the Deputy Registrar (OS) of this Court has forwarded the complaint and the same was numbered as C.C. No. 3303 of 2014 on the file of the VII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Chennai. Aggrieved over the same, the present applications have been filed by the applicants for the reliefs as stated supra.

8. It is the case of the applicants herein that by merely accepting the contention of the respondent herein, the learned Master has passed





























































































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 Back to top