Skip to content


Subramania Kandar Vs. Ramaswami Kandar - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtChennai
Decided On
Reported in1949CriLJ201; (1948)1MLJ406
AppellantSubramania Kandar
RespondentRamaswami Kandar
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.
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.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //