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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 29305

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
S.R. KRISHNA KUMAR, J
SRI K R SHIVAKUMAR – Appellant
Versus
SRI SRINIVAS – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI. HARISH KUMAR M.T.

Table of Content
1. interim compensation arguments initiated. (Para 1 , 2)

ORAL ORDER

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record.

"1. Learned counsel for the complainant filed this second successive application U/sec 143A of N.I. Act seeking for an order and direction to accused to deposit the interim compensation for the reasons stated in the application.

3. Heard arguments. Perused the material placed on record.

5. The earlier application filed by the complainant was kept in abeyance for 3 months and directed the accused to complete the cross-examination of Pw:1 within said period. As counsel for accused has failed to commence the cross examination of witness, counsel for complainant has requested the court to pass an appropriate order on IA.

7. Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka and Madras, in the above case it is held that, whenever the trial court exercises its jurisdiction U/Sec.143A (1) of the Act, it shall record reasons as to why it directs the accused person to pay the interim compensation to complainant. The reasons may be varied. For instance, (1) The accused person would have absconded for a longtime and thereby would have protracted the

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