Login : Advocate | Client
Home Post Your Case My Account Law College Law Library

Report No. 141

3.15. A third Madras case: dismissal of revision.-

In yet another Madras case1 of 1949, a complaint filed by the petitioner was dismissed under section 203, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. The petitioner preferred a criminal revision before the Sessions Judge, which was dismissed for default. Application for restoration was also dismissed by the Sessions Judge, who held that no such application lay. On further revision being filed before the Madras High Court, the High Court held that a revision petition before the Sessions Judge, dismissed for default cannot be restored.

1. Subrahmaniam v. Ramaswami, AIR 1949 Mad 154 (Govind Menon, J.).

Need for amending the Law as regards to the Power of Courts to Restore Criminal Revision Applications and Criminal cases dismissed for Default in Appearance Back

Client Area | Advocate Area | Blogs | About Us | User Agreement | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Media Coverage | Contact Us | Site Map
powered and driven by neosys