Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Banumathi vs Govindaram

Madras High Court|14 November, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The learned counsel for the petitioner is present. Court notice to the respondent was served.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that private notice was taken, but proof of service is awaited and the respondent is called absent today and hence, he was set exparte.
3.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner herein is the accused in C.C.No.289 of 2009 on the basis of the complaint given by the respondent herein under 138 N.I. Act.
4.The Trial Court has convicted the petitioner herein to undergo 1 month simple imprisonment and also directed to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation and in default 1 month simple imprisonment as per judgment dated 24.09.2014. Against the order of conviction, the petitioner has filed an appeal in Crl.A.No.141 of 2014 before the II Additional District Judge, Tiruchirapalli and the same was dismissed by the concerned Court on 16.08.2016, confirming the judgement of the Trial Court.
5.Aggrieved by that order of the Appellate Court, the present Criminal Revision case is preferred before this Court. On perusal of the judgment of the Appellate Court, both parties called absent at the time of hearing the appeal. Thereafter, the said appeal was dismissed going to the merits of the appeal but in the absence of both parties or their counsels.
6.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that when the matter was taken up for hearing, both the parties were not present. The said order was passed without hearing the parties and hence, the same is not sustainable in law and hence, the appeal cannot be dismissed without hearing the parties or their counsels.
7.In view of the above, the impugned judgment passed by the Appellate Court is liable to set aside. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision is allowed by setting aside the order passed by the Appellate Court in C.A.No.141 of 2014, dated 16.08.2016 directing the learned II Additional District Judge, Tiruchirapalli to restore the C.A.No.141 of 2014 to file and post the appeal for fresh disposal, after giving necessary opportunity to both parties and their counsels on record. The said Appeal shall be disposed of within a period of 2 months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and report the same to the Registry. The petitioner is directed to appear before the concerned Court and co-operate with the Appellate Court to dispose the appeal on merits without any delay.
To The II Additional District Judge, Tiruchirapalli.
.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Banumathi vs Govindaram

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
14 November, 2017