Allowed

Dr Uma Maheshwari v. Sandhya Vaidyanathan

Karnataka HC14 Dec 2022CRL.A/1978/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal appeal filed by the complainant challenging the dismissal of her complaint for default. The court set aside the impugned order and restored the case to the trial court, directing parties to appear for proceedings on merits.

What did the court decide?

The impugned judgment dated 11.11.2021 was set aside; the complaint was restored to the file; parties were directed to appear before the trial court on 18.01.2023.

Dr Uma Maheshwari Vs Sandhya Vaidyanathan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Karnataka HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2022

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MS.JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶6

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1978 OF 2021

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

DR UMA MAHESHWARI W/O A MANIKANTAN RESIDING AT 'A' BLOCK 1161, SHOBA TULIP, APARTMENTS 24^TH MAIN, J P NAGAR 5^TH PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 078

¶9

...COMPLAINANT/APPELLANT

¶10

(BY SRI. MITHUN S.K, ADVOCATE)

¶11

AND

¶12

SANDHYA VAIDYANATHAN AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS W/O MR VAIDYANATHAN RESIDING AT NO.101 8^TH MAIN, 5^TH CROSS, J P NAGAR 4^TH PHASE, BANGALORE - 560 078

¶13

......ACCUSED/RESPONDENT

¶14

(RESPONDENT SERVED)

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL FILED U/S 378 (4) OF CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 11.11.2021 PASSED IN C.C.NO.26089 OF 2017 BY THE XXX ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE, BANGALORE CITY VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND RESTORE THE CASE AND PASS SUCH OTHER ORDERS AS THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY DEEMS FIT IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE AND EQUITY.

¶16

¶17

THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

This appeal is by the complainant challenging the dismissal of the complaint on the ground that the complainant is not interested in prosecuting the complaint by taking steps.

¶20

For the sake of convenience the parties are referred to by their rank before the trial Court.

¶21

Inspite of due service of notice, respondent has remained absent.

¶22

Heard and perused the records.

¶23

Complainant filed the complaint in question

¶24

against accused for the offence punishable under Section 500 of I.P.C.

¶25

It is the case of the complainant that she is a

¶26

Doctor practicing at Cloud Nine Hospital since 13 years in the field of OBG and infertility. On 24.05.2015, accused approached the hospital for Hysterosal Pingogram (HSG) test. The test was successfully conducted. The result

¶27

¶28

showed that everything was normal. No antibiotics were required. Except the above, accused has not undergone any treatment, test or diagnosis.

¶29

6.1. However, on 19.07.2015, the complainant was shocked to see an article posted by accused in an internet website by name www.change.org making allegations against the complainant with an intention to harm her reputation. She has made defamatory allegations and therefore, the complaint is filed.

¶30

Vide order dated 12.10.2017, the trial Court has taken cognizance against accused for the offences punishable under Sections 499 and 500 of IPC.

¶31

From the order sheet it is evident that in spite of taking steps on several occasions including issue of NBW and proclamation, the complainant was not successful in securing the presence of accused.

¶32

Ultimately, on 11.11.2021, the trial Court has dismissed the complaint for default.

¶33

It is pertinent to note that in the present appeal, the notice is duly served on the respondent to

¶34

¶35

the address given in the appeal memo, which is different from the one given in the complaint. It appears complainant is succeeded in securing the correct address of the accused.

¶36

Since the case is not disposed of on merits, it is necessary to remand the same to the trial Court for disposal on merits in accordance with law by providing reasonable opportunity to the complainant.

¶37

No prejudice would be caused to the accused as she would get an opportunity to cross-examine the complainant and her witnesses, if any. Of course accused may also lead defence evidence, if necessary. Accordingly, I proceed to pass the following:

¶38

ORDER

¶39

(i) Appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 11.11.2021 is set aside. Complaint is restored to the file.

¶40

(ii) Complainant and accused are directed to appear before the trial Court on 18.01.2023 without waiting for notice from it.

¶41

¶42

(iii) The trial Court is directed to proceed with the

¶43

matter after providing reasonable opportunity to both parties.

¶44

(iv) Of course, if on 18.01.2023, accused fails to appear before the Court, the trial Court is at liberty to take coercive steps against her for securing her presence.

¶45

Sd/JUDGE

¶46

RR/MDS

Dr Uma Maheshwari v. Sandhya Vaidyanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr Uma Maheshwari v. Sandhya Vaidyanathan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nagaraju Vs State of Karnataka

Sri M Kumar Vs Smt Ameena B

S Suresha Vs Sathyanarayana

Mr Vikas T D Vs Mr Thimmaiah

Sri G v Sandeep Kumar Vs Sri Subhaschandra Bhose

Mrs Rajeshwari J Shetty Vs Sri Srinivas M K Nayak