IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 26325 of 2008(R)
1. SUSAMMA RAJAN,W/O.T.M.RAJAN,PROPRIETRESS
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
3. NAVAKERALA PRINTERS, KATTACHAL ROAD,
4. SHAJI SEBASTIAN, NAVAKERALA PRINTERS,
For Petitioner :SRI.B.PREMNATH (E)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
Dated :19/11/2008
O R D E R
R. BASANT, J.
-------------------------------------------------
W.P.(c)No. 26325 of 2008-R
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of November, 2008
JUDGMENT
The petitioner filed a complaint under Sec.138 of the
Negotiable Instruments Act before the learned Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Ernakulam. The learned CJM took cognizance and
made over the case under Sec.192 Cr.P.C. to the learned
Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-I, Kochi. The petitioner
was directed to appear before that court on 25/7/07.
2. The petitioner waited before that court on 25/7/07.
The case was not called there. Frantic enquiries were made;
but without any tangible results. The petitioner could not
collect from that court information about the fate of his case.
Helplessly the petitioner filed an application formally before
the learned Magistrate to give him directions as to when he
should appear in the case filed by him. The learned
Magistrate, after verifying the records, it appears, passed an
W.P.(c)No. 26325 of 2008-R
-: 2 :-
order that such a case is not transferred to that court and is not
pending in that court.
3. Helplessly the petitioner rushed to this Court. He
sought that appropriate directions may be issued. The reports
of the learned Magistrate and the learned CJM were called for.
It now turns out that though the case was ordered to be
transferred to the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-
I, Kochi, it did not reach that court. But surprisingly it reached
the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-II, Kochi.
More surprisingly the case was taken on file in that court. Still
more interestingly, while that was pending there, before parties
appeared, there was a further order of transfer. It was
transferred to yet another court. The petitioner had no
information of this odyssey of his case from one court to the
other. At least, in the course of pendency of this writ petition
before this Court, the petitioner was favoured with the
information that his case has now been re-numbered and shall be
called before the learned Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-
IV, Kochi, on 3/12/08. The petitioner’s immediate problem is
thus over.
W.P.(c)No. 26325 of 2008-R
-: 3 :-
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
insistence may be made on some method, in the manner in which
the cases are made over and transferred. The plight of the
petitioner is an outstanding example of the vexed litigants who
are forced to run from pillar to post in their quest to ascertain
the fate of their cases.
5. The learned CJM was requested to explain the
procedure that is followed in making over of the cases and the
manner in which such information is conveyed to the parties.
The learned CJM undertakes that hereafter notice shall be
published about the transfer/making over of the cases and that
attempt shall be made to ensure that no litigant will be forced to
face such predicament hereafter.
6. Purpose of this case is over as the petitioner has now
been informed that his case will be called before the learned
Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-IV, Kochi on 3/12/08. But I
am afraid the matter cannot be left here. The file shall be
placed before the Judge in administrative charge of the
Ernakulam District.
7. The Registrar General shall also take note of the
W.P.(c)No. 26325 of 2008-R
-: 4 :-
situation and ensure that appropriate general directions are
issued by the High Court to him to make sure that no litigant is
compelled hereafter to face such a predicament like the one
faced by the petitioner herein. Tears must be shed for the
petitioner who has definitely been constrained to incur
expenditure and waste time for getting this clarification
ultimately that his case is pending before a specified court and
will be called on 3/12/08.
8. This writ petition is, in these circumstances, closed.
Expeditious further action shall be taken in the matter by the
Registry to avoid recurrence of such events.
9. This petition is dismissed accordingly with the above
observations to the Registry.
(R. BASANT, JUDGE)
Nan/
W.P.(c)No. 26325 of 2008-R
-: 5 :-