Remanded

M/S.Fashion Fabrics v. M/S.Sona Apparels

Kerala HC12 Feb 2009Crl.Rev.Pet/308/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the oral dismissal of a cheque bounce complaint under Section 138 NI Act by the J.F.C.M., Ernakulam, which was allegedly based on non-deposit of process fee. The Court held the petitioner deserved an opportunity to remit the fee and restored the complaint to file for further proceedings without notice to the accused.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order setting aside is restored; complaint stood restored to file and to be disposed of in accordance with law; petitioner to appear on 26-02-2009 for further progress; notice to accused disp

M/S.Fashion Fabrics Vs M/S.Sona Apparels — Cheque Dishonour | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 12TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 23RD MAGHA 1930

¶5

Crl.Rev.Pet.No. 308 of 2009() ----------------------------ST.2262/2008 of J.F.C.M. V. ERNAKULAM

¶6

REVN. PETITIONER(S): COMPLAINANT

¶7

¶8

M/S. FASHION FABRICS, POST OFFICE, LINK ROAD, BROADWAY, ERNAKULAM, A REGISTERED PARTNERSHIP FORM REPRESENTED BY ITS PARTNER DEEPAK N. RAPAREL, AGED 46 YEARS.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.S.R.DAYANANDA PRABHU

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): ACCUSED

¶11

¶12

1.M/S. SONA APPARELS, PAINATH HOUSE, WEST CHALAKUDY, THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS PROPRIETRIX, MRS. ANITHA JOSE,

¶13

AGED 38 YEARS.

¶14

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶15

PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. PUZHAKKARA MUHAMMED

¶16

THIS CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

V. RAMKUMAR, J.

¶18

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Crl.R.P. NO. 308 of 2009**

¶19

*** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dated, this the 12**^th day of February, 2009

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The complainant in S.T. No. 2262 of 2008 on the file of the J.F.C.M. V, Ernakulam is the revision petitioner. The complaint was

¶22

filed under Sec. 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 and was originally instituted before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Ernakulam. It was subsequently transferred to the J.F.C.M. V, Ernakulam. The learned Magistrate has as per the impugned order dated 18-10-2008 dismissed the complaint under Sec. 204 (4) Cr.P.C. for the reason that process fee has not deposited. The petitioner has a grievance that process fee had been deposited along with the complaint. At any rate, the petitioner did not deserve a dismissal of the complaint for the aforesaid reason. The learned Magistrate ought to have given the petitioner an opportunity to

¶23

remit the process fee, in case, no process fee was deposited. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and S.T. No. 2262 of 2008 shall stand restored to file and shall be disposed of in accordance with law. The petitioner shall appear before the court

¶24

Crl.r.P. No. 308 of 2009

¶25

-:2:-

¶26

below without any further notice on 26-2-2009 by which time he shall be ready for the further progress of the complaint. Since the dismissal was at the pre-cognizance stage, notice to the accused is dispensed with in this Revision.

¶27

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2009.

¶28

V. RAMKUMAR, (JUDGE)

¶29

ani.

M/S.Fashion Fabrics v. M/S.Sona Apparels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Fashion Fabrics v. M/S.Sona Apparels

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Indira Rakesan Vs Anie Xavier

Antu Vs State of Kerala

Hamza Vs State of Kerala

Kumaran Vs State of Kerala

Rajeev Vs State of Kerala and Another

Kurian Chandy,Aged 72 Years Vs Santhoshkumar & Another