Smt M S Meenakshamma Vs Sri Santhosha Naika

SMT. M.S. MEENAKSHAMMA SINCE DEAD REPRESENTED BY HIS LRS A.M. PRASANNA SON OF LATE MANJUNATH GOWDA AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS RESIDENT OF HEECHALLI ESTATE HELEKERE VILALGE AND POST GONIBEEDU HOBLI MUDIGERE TALUK CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT-577132.

¶10

…APPELLANT

¶11

(BY SRI. SHANKARANARAYANA BHAT N., ADVOCATE)

¶12

Digitally signed by MAHALAKSHMI B M Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶13

AND:

¶14

SRI SANTHOSHA NAIKA AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS SON OF LAKYA NAIKA RESIDENT OF BANDRI THANDA VILLAGE AND POST HARAPANAHALLI TALUK DAVANAGERE DISTRICT-583131.

¶15

…RESPONDENT

¶16

THIS CRL.A IS FILED U/S 378(4) CR.PC (FILED U/S 419(4) OF BNSS) PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER / JUDGMENT IN C.C.NO.197/2020 ON THE FILES OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, MUDIGERE DATED 01.10.2021.

¶17

2 -

¶18

NC: 2026:KHC:8610 CRL.A No. 142 of 2025

¶19

HC-KAR

¶20

THIS APPEAL, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, JUDGMENT WAS DELIVERED THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶21

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G BASAVARAJA

¶22

ORAL JUDGMENT

¶23

This appeal is filed by the appellant/

¶24

complainant being aggrieved by the dismissal of complaint vide order 01.10.2021 passed in C.C No.197/2020 by the Principal Civil Judge and JMFC, Mudigere (for short "the trial Court")

¶25

The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CELESTIUM FINANCIAL v. A GNANASEKARAN ETC.

¶26

reported in 2025 SCC ONLINE SC 1320, at paragraph 10 of the judgment, has observed as under:

¶27

" 10. As already noted, the proviso to Section 372 of Cr.P.C. was inserted in the statue book only with effect from 31.12.2009. The object and reason for such insertion must be realised and must be given its full effect to by a court. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hold that the victim of an offence has the right to prefer an

¶28

3 - NC: 2026:KHC:8610 CRL.A No. 142 of 2025

¶29

HC-KAR

¶30

appeal under the proviso to Section 372 of Cr. P.C., irrespective of whether he is a complainant or not. Even if the victim of an offence is a complainant, he can still proceed under the proviso to Section 372 and need not advert to sub-section (4) of Section 378 of Cr. P.C. "

¶31

In the light of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's

¶32

recent clarification of the legal position, it is now evident that the appellant, being the complainant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, is also entitled to file an appeal before the Sessions Court. If this Court were to proceed to hear and decide the appeal at this stage, it could deprive the parties of an available forum, i.e. this Court, for further challenge.

¶33

Considering the above, it is deemed fit that the

¶34

present appeal be transferred to the concerned appellate Court of Sessions. Accordingly, I pass the following:

¶35

O R D E R

¶36

i. Registry is directed to transfer the entire record of the case to the concerned

¶37

4 -

¶38

NC: 2026:KHC:8610 CRL.A No. 142 of 2025

¶39

HC-KAR

¶40

Principal District & Sessions Judge, who may assign it to the concerned Appellate Court having the jurisdiction and for which purpose, it would be listed before the Principal District & Sessions Judge;

¶41

ii. The concerned transferee court is directed to issue Court notice to both the parties to appear before the concerned Court, and the concerned Court, thereafter, shall proceed with the case in accordance with law;

¶42

iii. In case there are applications pending for condonation of delay or any other pending applications, the same also be transferred to be considered by the learned Judge of transferee Court, in accordance with law;

¶43

iv. Considering the matter has been pending for considerable time, the Appellate Court is requested to make an endeavour to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible;

¶44

v. The appellant is permitted to carry out necessary amendment in the cause-title and also the provisions thereof;

¶45

5 -

¶46

NC: 2026:KHC:8610 CRL.A No. 142 of 2025

¶47

HC-KAR

¶48

vi. It is made clear that this Court has not made any observations as to the merits of the case and all rights and contentions of the parties are left open to be agitated before the Court concerned.

¶49

In the light of the above observation and

¶50

directions, appeal stands disposed of .

¶51

Sd/(G BASAVARAJA) JUDGE

¶52

MBM

¶53

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 19

Smt M S Meenakshamma v. Sri Santhosha Naika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt M S Meenakshamma v. Sri Santhosha Naika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri K S Mallikarjuna Vs Sri Adikesha Prakash K a

Smt Rukmini Vs Sri.v.Manjunath

Sri. Srinivasa Murthy Vs Sri. Raghu Y.N

Sri R C Rajaput Vs Sri Suresh Hallur

Sri Gowdaiah Vs Sri v Selvaraj

T Ravichandra Vs Smt v Sandhya