Kerala High Court
M/S.Asianet Satellite Communications ... vs M/S Indo Asian News Channel Private ...
Author: P.Ubaid
Bench: P.Ubaid
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/7TH MAGHA, 1937
OP(Crl.).No. 37 of 2016 (Q)
-------------------------------------
ST 635/2015 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHOTTANIKKARA
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
----------------------
M/S.ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT
HAVING ITS OFFICE AT 2A,
2ND FLOOR, LEELA INFOPARK, INFOPARK CAMPUS,
KAZHAKOOTTAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
PIN-695 581 REPRESENTED BY ALEX JOSE PAIKADA,
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.JOSE M. PAIKADA, EXECUTIVE (LEGAL)
COCHIN OFFICE.
BY ADVS.SRI.SAJI VARGHESE
SRI.G.RAJAGOPAL
RESPONDENT(S):
------------------------
1. M/S INDO ASIAN NEWS CHANNEL PRIVATE LIMITED,
A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT HAVING
ITS OFFICE AT H.M.T. COLONY P.O.,
KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM,
PIN-683503 REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR.
2. M.V. NIKESH KUMAR, MANAGING DIRECTOR,
M/S INDO ASIAN NEWS CHANNEL PRIVATE LIMITED, H.M.T. COLONY P.O.,
KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM, PIN-683503.
THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-01-2016,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
OP(Crl.).No. 37 of 2016 (Q)
--------------------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-------------------------------------
EXT.P1: TRUE TYPED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.11.2015 IN S.T.NO.635 OF
2015 ON THE FILES OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATES
COURT, CHOTTANIKKARA.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
---------------------------------------
NIL.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
PJ
P.UBAID, J.
~~~~~~~~~~
O.P (Crl) No.37 of 2016
~~~~~~~~~~~
Dated this the 27th January, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner herein brought a complaint initially before the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Ernakulam alleging the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the respondents herein. The complaint was later made over to the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Chottanikara by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. On the finding that the said court has no territorial jurisdiction in view of the recent Amendment brought to the Negotiable Instruments Act, the learned Magistrate at Chottanikara returned the complaint to the petitioner for presentation before the proper court. Accordingly, the petitioner presented the complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-XII, Thiruvananthapuram. But the learned Magistrate there declined the request to receive the complaint, on the ground that the case will have to be transferred properly under the law. Now the petitioner is helpless. The O.P (Crl) No.37 of 2016 2 complaint stands returned from one court and it has not been received by the other court where it is proposed to be presented. The petitioner seeks a direction from this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to the court below to receive the complaint and proceed appropriately.
2. On hearing the learned counsel, I feel it appropriate to direct the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-XII, Thiruvananthapuram to receive the complaint, and if there is some confusion or doubt or dispute regarding the territorial jurisdiction in view of the recent Amendment brought to the Negotiable Instruments At, he can take decision appropriately. When a complaint is returned from one court for presentation before another court, the latter court is expected to receive the complaint, and if there is some dispute or doubt regarding territorial jurisdiction, the latter court will have to take a decision on the question of jurisdiction. This must be the proper and legal course.
In the result, this Original Petition is disposed of with direction to the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court XII, O.P (Crl) No.37 of 2016 3 Thiruvananthapuram to receive the petitioner's complaint returned from the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Chottanikkara, proceed on it as provided under the law, and if there is any doubt or dispute regarding the territorial jurisdiction in view of the recent Amendment brought to the Negotiable Instruments Act, the learned Magistrate shall take appropriate decision. If it is found that the said court has territorial jurisdiction, the learned Magistrate shall proceed on the complaint according to law. The petitioner is permitted to represent the complaint before the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court-XII, Thiruvananthapuram within two weeks from this date.
Sd/-
P.UBAID JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.S to Judge