Madras High CourtCRL RC(MD)/528/2017disposed of

Palanisamy, v. P.Subramanian,

2021-11-15Honourable Mrs Justice R. Tharani3 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Wednesday, the Twenty Seventh day of October Two Thousand Twenty One PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice R.PONGIAPPAN Palanisamy, S/o. Muthusamy Proprietor Vigneshwara and Co., Petrol Bunk,Thoppampatti Palani Taluk Dindigul District.

..Revision Petitioner/Appellant/Respondent Vs P.Subramanian,S/o Palanisamy 47 New Darapuram Road,Palani Town.

Dindigul District.

..1stRespondent/1st Respondent/Complainant

2. The Public Prosecutor,Dindigul District, Dindigul .. 2nd Respondent/2nd Respondent Prayer :- This Criminal Revision Case filed under Section 397 & 401 of Cr.P.C. Praying this Court, to call for the records of pertaining to the Judgment in C.A. No.35 of 2012 dated 31.03.2016 by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dindigul confirmed conviction and sentence in U/s 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced to 3 months S.I. And to pay compensation oheque amount of Rs.75,000/- (Seventy Five Thousnad only) within 2 months from the date of pronouncement of Judgemnt unde Section 357(3) of Cr.P.C., by the Learned Fast Track Court at Magisterial level, Palani C.C. No.19 of 2011 dated 25.01.2012.

To 1.Palanisamy, S/o. Muthusamy Proprietor Vigneshwara and Co., Petrol Bunk,Thoppampatti.Palani Taluk Dindigul District.

.. Revision Petitioner 2.P.Subramanian, S/o Palanisamy 47 New Darapuram Road Palani Town.

Dindigul District.

..1st Respondent 1/3

Through THE PRINCIPAL DISTRICT JUDGE, DINDIGUL Whereas the Hon'ble Court while hearing the cases, has given a direction as follows:- "Today, when these revisions are came up for hearing, both the counsels appearing for the revision petitioner and the respondent are appeared before this Court through Video Conferencing. It is the submission made by the respondent that pertains to Cr. RC(MD) No.528 of 2017, the matter is not settled so far. Therefore, in the said circumstances, it is appropriate to direct the parties to appear before this Court to verifying the same whether issue was settled or not? Hence, both the parties are directed appear before this Court on 15.11.2021.

Post this matter on 15.11.2021"

Whereas it is expedient in the interest of justice that the personal appearance of the aforesaid both parties, 1.Palanisamy ..

Revision Petitioner herein 2.P.Subramanian ..

1st Respondent herein are necessary and they shall appear before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai at 10.30 A.M on Monday, the Fifteenth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One (15/11/2021) In this connection you, namely (1)Palanisamy (Revision Petitioner), (2)P.Subramanian (1st Respondent), be and hereby are directed to appear in person before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai at 10.30 a.m on Monday, the Fifteenth day of November Two Thousand Twenty One (15/11/2021) HEREIN FAIL NOT, WITNESS The Hon`ble Thiru. Sanjib Banerjee, The Chief Justice of the High Court of Judicature at Madras on Wednesday, the Twenty Seventh day of October Two Thousand Twenty One(27/10/2021) ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(CS-III) 2/3

COPY TO:

The Public Prosecutor, Dindigul.

ORDER DATED : 27/10/2021 HEARING DATE : 15/11/2021 ========================== SUMMONS ========================== RD/PM (29.10.2021) 3P 5C 3/3