High Court Kerala High Court

M/S. Vaishnav Securities vs Sureshkumar on 6 June, 2008

Kerala High Court
M/S. Vaishnav Securities vs Sureshkumar on 6 June, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

CRL.A.No. 450 of 2008()


1. M/S. VAISHNAV SECURITIES,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. SURESHKUMAR, S/O. VELAYUDHAN,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.P.BALAGOPAL

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :06/06/2008

 O R D E R
                            R. BASANT, J.
               -----------------------------------------------
                   Crl. Appeal No. 450 OF 2008
               -----------------------------------------------
               Dated this the 6th day of June, 2008

                              JUDGMENT

Appellant is the complainant in a prosecution under Section

138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. A complaint was filed and

cognizance was taken in the year 2006. The case stood posted

to 09.11.2007. On that day there were attempts to settle the

dispute. The case was posted to 01.12.07 to report settlement.

But on that day there was no representation for the complainant

and the complainant was absent. The learned Magistrate, in these

circumstances, proceeded to dismiss the complaint invoking

powers under Section 256 Cr.P.C.

2. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the

appellant was not guilty of any contumacious laches. All through

he has been appearing before the Court and taking all necessary

steps to prosecute the complaint. But when the case was

adjourned on 09.11.07, the complainant and his counsel

understood that the case was posted to 04.12.07. They did not

know that the case was posted on 01.12.07. On 04.12.07 it was

revealed that the complaint had been already dismissed on

01.12.07. It is prayed that a lenient view may be taken and the

CRA No. 450 OF 2008
2

appeal may be allowed with liberty to prosecute his complaint.

3. Respondents though served, there is no representation.

In the facts and circumstances of this case, I am satisfied that a

lenient view can be taken and the appeal can be allowed with

liberty to prosecute his complaint.

4. In the result, this appeal is allowed. The impugned order

is set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to dispose of the

complaint afresh in accordance with law. The parties are directed

to appear before the learned Magistrate on 14.07.2008 to continue

the proceedings. Send back the records immediately to the court

below.

R. BASANT, JUDGE
ttb

CRA No. 450 OF 2008
3

CRA No. 450 OF 2008
4