Subramania Kandar Vs. Ramaswami Kandar

Subramania Kandar vs Ramaswami Kandar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 17, 1948

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/809187

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/809187
Court: Chennai
Decided On: Mar 17, 1948
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - 1. The learned Sessions Judge is perfectly right in holding that a revision dismissed for default of appearance cannot be restored to file.

Key legal issue: Criminal

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Subramania Kandar

Respondent

Ramaswami Kandar

Legal References

Reported In: 1949CriLJ201; (1948)1MLJ406

Excerpt

- - 1. the learned sessions judge is perfectly right in holding that a revision dismissed for default of appearance cannot be restored to file.ordergovinda menon, j.1. the learned sessions judge is perfectly right in holding that a revision dismissed for default of appearance cannot be restored to file. there is no provision in the code of criminal procedure analogous to order 9, rule 9 of the code of civil procedure or its equivalent in order 41, rule 19, civil procedure code.2. as the complaint was dismissed by the court of first instance only under section 203 of the code of criminal procedure, it does not prevent the complainant from filing a fresh complaint, if there are sufficient facts justifying such a course. the order of the learned sessions judge is correct. the revision petitions are dismissed.

Full Judgment

ORDER

Govinda Menon, J.

1. The learned Sessions Judge is perfectly right in holding that a revision dismissed for default of appearance cannot be restored to file. There is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure analogous to Order 9, Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure or its equivalent in Order 41, Rule 19, Civil Procedure Code.

2. As the complaint was dismissed by the Court of First Instance only under Section 203 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it does not prevent the complainant from filing a fresh complaint, if there are sufficient facts justifying such a course. The order of the learned Sessions Judge is correct. The revision petitions are dismissed.

Same Parties Subramania Kandar vs Ramaswami Kandar Same Subject Criminal

Criminal