Partly allowed

Parsuram Maruti Tawade v. M/S. Ajinkya Co-Op.Credit Soc. Ltd, and Anr.

Bombay HC5 Nov 2012APPR/82/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a batch of criminal applications regarding the conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the court allowed restoration of dismissed revisions conditional upon depositing 25% compensation within 30 days of this order, under pain of dismissal.

What did the court decide?

Restoration of criminal revisions allowed; Applicant directed to deposit 25% compensation within 30 days, under pain of dismissal.

Parsuram Maruti Tawade Vs M/S. Ajinkya Co-Op.Credit… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2012)

appr.82-2012.sxw

acd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 82 OF 2012 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.442 OF 2008

¶6

WITH

¶7

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 83 OF 2012 IN

¶8

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.443 OF 2008

¶9

WITH

¶10

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 84 OF 2012 IN

¶11

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.444 OF 2008

¶12

WITH

¶13

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 85 OF 2012 IN

¶14

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.445 OF 2008

¶15

WITH

¶16

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 86 OF 2012 IN

¶17

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.446 OF 2008

¶18

WITH

¶19

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 87 OF 2012 IN

¶20

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.447 OF 2008

appr.82-2012.sxw

WITH

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 88 OF 2012 IN CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.448 OF 2008

¶25

WITH

¶26

CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 89 OF 2012 IN

¶27

CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.449 OF 2008

¶28

Shri Parsuram Maruti Tawade

¶29

..Applicant.

¶30

Vs.

¶31

M/s Ajinkya Co.op. Credit Soc. Ltd. & Anr. ..Respondens.

¶32

Mr. P.G. Badole, for Applicant. Mr. P.D. Gharge, for Respondent No.1. Mr. D.R. More, A.P.P., for the State.

¶33

CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.

¶34

DATE : 5^th November, 2012.

¶35

P.C.:

¶36

1 Heard.

¶37

2 The respective revision applications were dismissed on 17.2.2012.

¶38

¶39

appr.82-2012.sxw

¶40

3 Normally the restoration is permitted considering the facts in each case. The conduct of the revision applicant is demonstrated illusion of discharging his liability in the matter of conviction u/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. The discretion of the Court, for restoration, should not be showered upon the revision applicant, as he has failed to comply with his obligation.

¶41

4 Now, the learned Counsel for the revision applicant submits, within 30 days in each of the case/revisions, the revision applicant shall deposit 25% of the compensation amount.

¶42

5 Accepting the statement, and recording no objection of the learned Counsel for the Respondent-original Complainant, restoration is allowed in each of the revisions.

¶43

6 The original-complainant is at liberty to withdraw the

amounts.

appr.82-2012.sxw

7 If the time schedule of deposit up to 5^th December, 2012 is not

¶48

adhered to, revision applicant shall face dismissal of the respective revisions.

¶49

(K.U. CHANDIWAL,J.)

Parsuram Maruti Tawade v. M/S. Ajinkya Co-Op.Credit Soc. Ltd, and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Parsuram Maruti Tawade v. M/S. Ajinkya Co-Op.Credit Soc. Ltd, and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Ramesh Tukaram Kalokhe

Chandulal B. Hinduja and Arn Vs Madhu Ramchand Lund and Anr.

Rajendra Kalicharan Verma Vs M/S. Samlalp Steel Corporation and Ors.

Zaira D. Gomes Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Omprakash Jhunjhunwala Vs Prabhat Ramrichpal Jhunjhunwala and Ors.

Palesh Bherulal Jain and Anr. Vs Nareshchandra M Rathod and Ors.