Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Imp Case Law Judical Academy Madras
Imp Case Law Judical Academy Madras
Part-5
September, 2006
Compiled by
Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy
Chennai 28
58
or later; (b) to make that of establishing a proposition as against all counter evidence; and (c) an
indiscriminate use in which it may mean either or both of the others The elementary rule in
Section 101 is inflexible Initial onus is always on plaintiff and if he discharges that onus and
makes out case which entitles him to relief, then onus shifts to Defendant to prove those
circumstances, it any, which would disentitle the Plaintiff to relief.
59
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 4 Objections regarding jurisdiction and
applicability of new Act should be raised at earliest point of time Party appeared before
Arbitrator and participated in proceedings without raising objections and with definite intention
that new Act would apply Parties had also contested application under Section 9 Party shall
be deemed to have waived plea regarding jurisdiction in not having raised same at earliest point
of time.
60
61
299, does not lay down the correct law. Accordingly, the Writ Appeal fails and the same is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.A.M.P. No.7784 of 2004 is also dismissed.
2006 (2) M.L.J (CRL.) 433
Vinayagam Vs. Aruna and another
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 125 Hindu Marriage Act (25 of
1955) Restitution of conjugal rights Claim for maintenance by wife and minor daughter
granted Said order challenged by husband on ground wife not complied with order of
restitution of conjugal rights against her She not returned to matrimonial home Admission by
husband on maintenance proceedings that he assaulted wife and daughter and turned them out of
home Such assault sufficient ground for claiming maintenance Hence wife not estopped by
decree of restitution of conjugal rights, from claiming maintenance.
Wife is not estopped from claiming maintenance by earlier decree of restitution of
conjugal rights, if there is an intervening circumstance providing sufficient ground for claiming
maintenance.
384 unbelievable complainant although allegedly attacked, did not go to Government hospital
for treatment Medical prescription a concocted document No ground to raise grave suspicion
against accused Accused to be discharged.
When framing charges under Section 227, Criminal Procedure Code the magistrate has
power to sift and weigh the evidence to find out whether a prima facie case against accused
exists. The court shall discharge the accused if there is no sufficient ground for putting the
accused on trial.
Copy Right Act (14 of 1957), Section 63 Infringement of copy right Registration of
Copy right, not a condition precedent for invoking criminal prosecution.
offence Special Court constituted under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes
(Prevention of Atrocities ) Act Cognizance of offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act
Taking direct cognizance by Special Judge upon final report of Investigating Officer Without
the case being committed to it by Jurisdiction Magistrate Entire trial proceedings vitiated
Conviction not maintainable Appeal allowed.
Neither in the Code of Criminal Procedure nor in the Act (33 of 1989) is there any
provision whatsoever, not even by implication, that the specified Court of Session (Special
Court) can take cognizance of the offence under the Act as a Court of original jurisdiction
without the case being committed to it by a Magistrate. Taking direct cognizance by Special
Court on the basis of the final report filed by the Investigating Officer and subsequent trial are
vitiated.
64
Criminal Rules of Practice, Rule 339 Issuance of certified copies of record of criminal
case to parties Rule 339 stipulates that copies of portion of record of criminal case must be
furnished to parties concerned on payment of proper stamp and authorised fee for copying
Trial Court cannot refuse to receive copy Application but is bound to follow Rule 339
Directions issued.
65
When detenu, a hireling, is continuously involved in serious crimes, the nature and
gravity of which are prejudicial to maintenance of public order, the detention order is valid and
sustainable.
66
Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), Section 302 Murder Appreciation of evidence
Accused charged with killing of his superior in office by shooting him with gun Strong motive
67
for the offence established Evidence of P.W.1 son of the deceased, was inspiring Variance in
his evidence before the court and his complaint to the police regarding number of gun shots fired
at the victim Cannot be considered as vital as to affect his evidence Evidence regarding oral
dying declaration made by deceased to his close relatives found to be convincing Fact that
P.W.1 did not make any mention in the complaint about the dying declaration made to him
would not vitiate his evidence Report of the ballistic expert showing that the cartridge
recovered could not have been fired from the weapon produced by the Police Is not significant,
in view of the overwhelming evidence available in this case Accordingly the conviction and
sentence imposed on the accused by the Lower Court confirmed.
From the mere fact that the report of the Ballistic Expert shows that the cartridge
recovered could not have been fired from the weapon produced in the Court, it cannot be
concluded that the whole prosecution case must fall to the ground, when there is no other
overwhelming evidence to prove the guilt of the accused.
68
Held: With very vague allegation, the respondent has come out with a private complaint
having failed in his attempt to convince the Police authorities to register a case, based on the
complaint preferred by him after withdrawing the Criminal Original Petition filed before this
Court Civil Court had thoroughly analysed the history of title and ultimately recorded the
finding that the respondent has no title over the property.
Respondent having failed in all his attempts has now come out with a vexatious
complaint to rope in the petitioners herein, in a case of forgery No party can be permitted to
wreak vengeance as against the counter party who succeeded before various Civil Courts in the
hierarchy in the civil lis laid by him Respondent/complainant has unnecessarily dragged the
petitioners and others out of frustration over the outcome of the civil lis brought against him
Such a criminal proceeding cannot be allowed to work hardship not only as against the
petitioners herein and also against the other accused in C.C. In the result, the criminal
proceeding pending on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Poonamallee, not only
against the second and third accused, but also as against the other accused in the said case, stands
quashed Crl.O.Ps. allowed.
69
file the charge sheet against the aggressor As this procedure was not followed, conviction of
the accused set aside.
70
accordance with injury and injury may bring about many consequences like loss of earning
capacity, loss of mental pleasure and may such consequential losses It is open to Tribunal to
award different sums of damages higher than those claimed under particular head of damages so
long as Tribunal does not exceed total amount claimed Damages awarded for non-pecuniary
damages for pain, suffering and loss of amenities cannot be reduced even if quantum of
pecuniary damages payable is high Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal should itemise award
under each of head namely Pecuniary Losses and Non-pecuniary Losses Under head Nonpecuniary Losses Tribunal shall consider (a) pain and suffering; (b) loss of amenity; (c) loss of
expectation of life, hardship, mental stress, etc. and (d) loss of prospect of marriage Under
head Pecuniary Losses, Tribunal shall consider loss of earning capacity and loss of future
earnings as one component apart from medical and other expenses and loss of earning if any
from date of accident till date of trial When loss of earning capacity is compensated as also
non-pecuniary losses under (a) to (d) permanent disability need not be separately itemized.
71
The Power of Attorney holder of the payee or the holder in due course of the cheque,
will be competent to make a complaint. Only when the validity of the Power of Attorney is
questioned, the Court could be called upon to decide the genuineness or its validity at a later
stage of proceedings.
72
Held: Rejecting the contention, when the amount payable to the Advocate towards fees
is found due, then it becomes a debt Such debt is legally enforceable Though the Advocate in
the legal profession is supposed to do service to the public, he is entitled under law to receive
fees for the service he renders When such amount is not paid when it becomes due, it becomes
a debt Crl.O.P. dismissed.
2006-2-L.W.(Crl.) 703
Ramaswamy Vs. M/s. Dhanalakshmi Bankers rep. by its Managing Partner Mr.
Kandaswamy
Negotiable Instruments Act (1881) Section 138, - Criminal Procedure Code, Section 245
Revision against the dismissal of the discharge petition filed under Section 245 Cr.P.C. Plea
73
urged that the entire loan amount for which the cheques were issued was discharged but despite
the same, the complainant has not returned the said two cheques and that the cheque has been
materially altered which can be seen from the difference in ink and as such, the complaint is not
maintainable.
Held:
The learned Judicial Magistrate recorded finding that the date 29.02.2001
mentioned in the cheque issued by the accused will not in any manner affect the case of the
complainant and that the case has been pending for two years and the examination of witnesses
on the side of the complainant has been completed Inasmuch as the criminal case C.C.No.253
of 2001 is a summons case and initiated under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act,
against the revision petitioner/accused, it is not open to the revision petitioner/accused to seek
discharge Revision dismissed.
74
ROC.No. 44 / 2006 / JA
November 2006
To
All the Principal District Judges.
Sir / Madam,
Greetings from the Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy.
The important case laws compiled by Tamil Nadu State Judicial Academy for the
month of October 2006 (Part 6 of Vol. I) is enclosed herewith and the same is sent for circulation
among all the Judicial Officers in the district.
Yours faithfully,
DIRECTOR
75