Wednesday, 13, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mr. Subramani. V vs Mr. Valentine Domnik Cedric D Sa
2024 Latest Caselaw 26488 Kant

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 26488 Kant
Judgement Date : 6 November, 2024

Karnataka High Court

Mr. Subramani. V vs Mr. Valentine Domnik Cedric D Sa on 6 November, 2024

Author: V Srishananda

Bench: V Srishananda

                                               -1-
                                                          NC: 2024:KHC:44732
                                                     CRL.RP No. 1008 of 2018




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

                          DATED THIS THE 6TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

                                            BEFORE
                           THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA
                        CRIMINAL REVISION PETITION NO. 1008 OF 2018


                   BETWEEN:

                   1.    MR. SUBRAMANI. V
                         MANAGING DIRECTOR
                         AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS
                         SANJANA BUILD-TECH PRIVATE LIMITED,
                         NO.1616 (84), ABOVE WHIZZ COLOR LAB,
                         8TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD BLOCK,
                         JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011.

                   2.    SANJANA BUILD TECH PRIVATE LIMITED
                         NO.1616 (84), ABOVE WHIZZ COLOR LAB,
                         8TH MAIN ROAD, 3RD BLOCK,
                         JAYANAGAR, BENGALURU-560 011,
                         REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
                         MR. SUBRAMANI V.,
Digitally signed                                              ...PETITIONERS
by BHARATHI S
Location: HIGH     (BY SRI MAHESH S.N., ADVOCATE)
COURT OF
KARNATAKA
                   AND:

                   MR. VALENTINE DOMNIK CEDRIC D'SA
                   SON OF MR. ANTONY D'SA,
                   AGED ABOUT 57 YEARS,
                   RESIDING AT NO.R-417,
                   PURVA PARK, COX TOWN,
                   BENGALURU-560 005,
                   REPRESENTED BY HIS WIFE
                   AND DULY AUTHORIZED
                              -2-
                                           NC: 2024:KHC:44732
                                     CRL.RP No. 1008 of 2018




POWER OF ATTORNEY,
MRS. CLARETTE T F D'SA
                                                 ...RESPONDENT
(BY SRI RAHUL KARIYAPPA, ADVOCATE)

     THIS CRL.RP IS FILED U/S.397 R/W 401 CR.P.C PRAYING
TO (1).SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT DATED 28.05.2018 PASSED
IN CRL.A.NO.1255/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE LVIII
ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSION JUDGE AT BENGALURU
(CCH-59) (2).TO SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF
CONVICTION      DATED      29.09.2016,     PASSED     IN
C.C.NO.3359/2014 ON THE FILE OF THE HON'BLE XVI ACMM,
BY ALLOWING THE ABOVE PETITIONER BY ACQUITTING THE
PETITIONER.

    THIS CRL.RP, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY,
ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V SRISHANANDA


                      ORAL ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a memo

dated 06.11.2024, which reads as under:

The counsel for the petitioner herewith files the memo of calculation as follows:

1. The petitioner was deposited amount of Rs.3,70,000/- as per the appellate court order.

2. On 18/12/2018 the petitioner was paid a sum of Rs.4,00,000/- though D.D.

3. On 21/01/2019 for a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- through D.D

NC: 2024:KHC:44732

4. A sum of Rs. 2,00,000/- by way of cheque

4. on 23/09/2024 for a Sum of Rs.1,50,000/-tThrough D.D. before this Hon'ble court.

Total sum of 13,20,000/-was paid out of 18,40,000/- the petitioner was due sum of Rs.5,20,000/- to the respondent, he has agreed to pay within two months from the date of this order

Wherefore, it is respectfully prays that this Hon'ble court be pleased to consider the memo of calculation in the above case, in the interest of justice.

2. Placing the memo on record, the present revision

petition stands disposed of.

3. It is made clear that the amount as agreed in the

memo is not paid, order of the trial Magistrate stands

restored automatically.

4. In view of the memo, the entire amount as per the

memo is paid, fine amount of `10,000/- imposed by the

trial Magistrate and confirmed by the first appellate Court

NC: 2024:KHC:44732

towards the defraying expense of the State is hereby set

aside.

5. The amount in deposit is ordered to be withdrawn

by the complainant under due identification.

Sd/-

(V SRISHANANDA) JUDGE

BS

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter