V.Baskar v. V.Radhakrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 06-10-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI V.Baskar S/o.Venugopal, No.3, Thirvanthipuram Main Road, Koothappakkam, Cuddalore-607 002 Petitioner(s) Vs
1. V.Radhakrishnan S/o.Vellakannu, Nadu Theru, Villayanallur and Post, bhuavnagiri Taluk 2.V.Jayachandran, S/o.Vellakannu, Nadu Theru, Villayanallur and Post, Bhuvanagiri Taluk 3.G.Manivannan S/o.Gopalakrishnan, Nadu Theru, Villayanallur and Post, Bhuvanagiri Taluk 4.S.Chandrasekar Registrar 2004- Yr Parangipettai, Present Address, No.10/1A, Koorathalwan Chandu, Tirupapuliyur, Cuddalore-2 1/6
5.Nasir Iqbal Formely Bhuvanagiri Tahsildar, Present Neyveli special Tahsildar (Nilakayakam,), Neyveli , Cuddalore District 6.Usharani Formely Chidambaram District Registrar (Administration), Now Cuddalore District Registrar (Administration), Cuddalore-2 7.B.S.Vijayalakshmi Formely Chidambaram Revenue Commissioner , Now General manager Ecott Company, MHU Complex, 2nd Floor, 692, Anna Salai, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035 8.T.Mohan Formely Puduchattram Police Inspector, Now Senturai Police Inspector, Senturai Police station, Ariyalur District 9.Special District Revenue Officer Nilakayakam, National Highway Project, Cuddalore 10.Special District Collector (Nilakayakam) National Highway Project, Cuddalore Respondent(s) PRAYER To set aside the judgment dt.20.01.2023 in CMP.No.3781/2018 on the file of District Munsif Cum Judicial magistrate Portonovo(FAC) and to allow the above Criminal Revision .
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. R.Nalliyappan 2/6
ORDER
Challenging the impugned order passed by the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Portonovo (FAC) in C.M.P.No.3781 of 2018, the petitioner preferred this Criminal Revision Petition.
2. Before the trial court, the petitioner filed a complaint under Sec.200 of Cr.P.C. praying to initiate proceedings against the respondents for the alleged offence under Sections 81, 82 (3) of Indian Registration Act, Sec.167, 198, 199, 201, 218, 219, 221, 467, 471, 474 of I.P.C. and Sec.84 and 85 of The Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. But, due to his non-appearance continuously, the trial court dismissed the complaint. Challenging the said findings, now the petitioner preferred this Criminal Revision Petition.
3. The learned counsel for petitioner argues that due to lack of communication, he is not able to follow the proceedings. However, he is having valid defence to prove his case, but the opportunity was not given by the trial court. Hence, he prayed to set aside the findings rendered by the trial court.
4. Heard and considered submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner and perused materials available on record. 3/6
5. Considering his submissions, the fact reveals that due to lack of communication, he was not able to follow the proceedings, but the trial court erroneously dismissed the complaint as such is liable to be set aside. Therefore, to give one more opportunity, this Court is inclined to set aside the findings of trial judge in C.M.P.No. 3781 of 2018 on the file of District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Portonovo (FAC). Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed. However, the petitioner is directed to cooperate with the proceedings before the trial court.
06-10-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes rpp To District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate, Portonovo (FAC) 4/6
5/6
T.V.THAMILSELVI J.
, rpp CRL RC No. 1910 of 06-10-2025 6/6