Skip to content


The Honourable the Advocate General Vs. Govindasawmi Alias Kristna-sawmy - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in15Ind.Cas.306
AppellantThe Honourable the Advocate General
RespondentGovindasawmi Alias Kristna-sawmy
Excerpt:
sentence - concurrent sentences--criminal procedure code (act v of 1898), section 397--different trials. - securitisation & reconstruction of financial assets & enforcement of security interest act, 2002 [c.a. no. 54/2002]section 17; power of tribunal to impose condition relating to deposit for grant of stay of auction held, there is no specific provision made under section 17 of securitisation act or under any other provisions of the said act empowering the tribunal to pass any interim order. but under sub-section (12) of section 19 of the recovery of debts due to banks and financial institutions act, 1993, the tribunal has been empowered to pass various interim orders. if sub-section (7) of section 17 of securitisation act is read along with sub-section (12) of section 19 of recovery.....order1. we are of opinion that the learned judge erred in law in directing that the sentence of imprisonment, passed by him on govindasawmy in respect of the second count in case no. 12 of the fourth criminal sessions of this court for the year 1911, should run concurrently with the sentence of imprisonment which had been passed on the said govindasawmi in respect of the second count in case no. 16 of the third criminal sessions of this court for the year 1911.2. we set aside the sentence and direction, and in lieu thereof, we sentence the said govindasawmi to one day's rigorous imprisonment to commence at the expiration of the period of imprisonment to which he was sentenced in case no. 16 of the third criminal sessions for the year 1911.
Judgment:
ORDER

1. We are of opinion that the learned Judge erred in law in directing that the sentence of imprisonment, passed by him on Govindasawmy in respect of the second count in Case No. 12 of the Fourth Criminal Sessions of this Court for the year 1911, should run concurrently with the sentence of imprisonment which had been passed on the said Govindasawmi in respect of the second count in Case No. 16 of the Third Criminal Sessions of this Court for the year 1911.

2. We set aside the sentence and direction, and in lieu thereof, we sentence the said Govindasawmi to one day's rigorous imprisonment to commence at the expiration of the period of imprisonment to which he was sentenced in Case No. 16 of the Third Criminal Sessions for the year 1911.


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