Madras High Court
M/S.Success Fire Services Pvt Ltd vs M/S Saravana Enterprises on 3 March, 2022
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 03.03.2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.PONGIAPPAN
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in
Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
1.M/s.Success Fire Services Pvt Ltd.,
Represented by its Chief Executive,
K.AL.Swaminathan,
No.22, A8, R.K.Flats, R.A.Puram, 3rd Street,
Adambakkam, Chennai 600 108
2.K.AL.Swaminathan ...Petitioners
Vs.
M/s Saravana Enterprises,
Represented by one of its Partners
And General Power of Attorney,
R.Krishnamoorthy,
New No.59, Old No.29,
Guruvappa Chetty Street,
Chindradipet, Chennai 600 002 ... Respondent
PRAYER: Criminal Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C to condone the delay of 1879 days in preferring the criminal revision
petition against the order dated 10.09.2014 passed in Crl.Appeal No.148 of
2012 by the learned XIX Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai.
Page 1 of 6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
For Petitioners : Mr.AR.M.Arunachalam
For Respondent : Mr.V.N.Amudhan
ORDER
This petition has been filed to condone the delay of 1879 days in
preferring the criminal revision against the order dated 10.09.2014 passed in
Crl.A.No.148 of 2012 by the learned XIX Additional City Civil Judge,
Chennai.
2. The averments found in the affidavit filed in support of this
petition is that the petitioner is an accused in CC.No.16212 of 2008 on the
file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, Fast Track Court-II, Egmore, Chennai.
By order dated 31.07.2012, the learned trial court convicted and sentenced
the petitioner under Section 138 of NI Act to undergo three months rigorous
imprisonment and to pay compensation of Rs.4,00,000/- within one month,
in default to undergo one month simple imprisonment. Challenging the said
order of conviction, the petitioner herein preferred appeal before the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
XIX Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai in Crl.A.No.148 of 2012. In the
said appeal, the petitioner filed miscellaneous petition in Crl.MP.No.8397
of 2012 seeking to suspend the sentence on conviction imposed upon him.
The learned XIX Additional City Civil Judge, Chennai by order dated
22.08.2012, suspended the sentence imposed on the petitioner on condition
that the petitioner deposit a sum of Rs.30,000/- within one month therefrom.
3. Later, the conditional order passed by the learned XIX Additional
City Civil Judge, Chennai in Crl.MP.No.8397 of 2012 could not be
complied by the petitioner for the reasons that the petitioner suffered from
the accident in the year 2009. In the meanwhile by order dated 10.09.2014,
the learned presiding officer of the XIX Additional City Civil Court,
Chennai dismissed the appeal for the reason that the appellants are not
present as well as for the reason that conditional order passed has not been
complied with. Now challenging the same, the petitioner intended to file a
criminal revision and by which since the period of limitation is already
exhausted, the present petition has been filed for condoning the delay.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
4. The averments found in the counter filed by the respondent is that
the reasons stated in the affidavit for condoning the delay is not having any
truth. This petition is filed with untenable reason. The petitioner was
involved in the accident in the year 2009. When the appeal itself was in the
year 2012, the petitioner was able to attend the court till obtaining order of
suspension of sentence. Thereafter he wantonly failed to appear and now
states because of the said accident, he could not appear before the court.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned counsel appearing for the respondent.
6. The first and foremost contention raised by the learned counsel for
the petitioner is that due to the accident happened in the year 2009, the
petitioner becomes vegetable and he is not in a position to move from one
place to another place. It is his further submission that after the accident a
plate was fixed in his body and due to the same, he was not in a position to
approach his counsel and due to the same, delay has occurred.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
7. Now on considering the said submissions with the relevant records,
the petitioner herein is intended to file a revision against the order passed in
the year 2014. Furthermore, he presented the appeal before the XIX
Additional City Civil Court, Chennai in the year 2012. Therefore in the said
circumstances, being the reason the alleged accident had happened in the
year of 2009, the reasons stated by the petitioner for condoning the delay
cannot be accepted. If the averments found in the affidavit as he sustained
multiple injury, it would not be possible to file an appeal in the year 2012.
Further the period of 1879 days is not an ordinary delay. Furthermore, after
pronouncing judgment in the year 2014, the petitioner has not taken any
steps to settle the issue by paying cheque amount since the alleged offence
committed by the petitioner is punishable under Section 138 of NI Act. So
the reasons stated by the petitioner for condoning the delay is not an
acceptable one.
8. Accordingly, this criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed.
03.03.2022
lok
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
R.PONGIAPPAN, J.
lok
To
The learned XIX Additional City Civil Judge,
Chennai.
Crl.M.P.No.1578 of 2020
in
Crl.RC.SR.No.4911 of 2020
03.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
