Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C.S.DIAS, J
CAPITAL INVESTMENTS – Appellant
Versus
THANUJA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. complaint filed alleging offence under n.i. act (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner’s argument regarding delay in filing (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. finding on necessity of evidence for condonation (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's emphasis on substantial justice over technicality (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. final decision on setting aside previous orders (Para 10) |
ORDER
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2025 The petitioner is the complainant in CMP No.2939/2017 on the file of the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thrissur (‘Trial Court’, in short), which has been filed against the 1st respondent alleging the commission of the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘N.I.Act’, in short).
2. The petitioner had filed Annexure A1 complaint along with Annexure A2 application to condone the delay of 18 days in filing the complaint. However, by the impugned Annexure A3 order, the Trial Court dismissed the application on the ground that the petitioner did not let in any oral evidence to prove the delay. Aggrieved by Annexure A3 order, the petitioner preferred Crl.R.P.No.89/2017 before the IVth Additional Sessions Court, Thrissur (‘Revisional Court’, in short). However, b
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
