Kerala High Court
M/S.Phillips Carbon Black Ltd vs M/S.Bravura Fabrica (P) Ltd on 17 October, 2012
Author: V.K.Mohanan
Bench: V.K.Mohanan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/25TH ASWINA 1934
CRL.A.No. 1365 of 2006
--------------------------
CC.714/2001 of CHIEF JUDL.MAGISTRATE COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANT/COMPLAINANT:
------------------------
M/S.PHILLIPS CARBON BLACK LTD.,
NETHAJI SUBASH ROAD,ITS BRANCH OFFICE AT
RUKMINI BUILDINGS, KRISHNASWAMY ROAD,ERNAKULAM
NOW AT SAFEENA MANSION, RAVIPURAM,ERNAKULAM
REP.BY ITS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER,
SANTHOSH KUMAR P.
BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY
RESPONDENT/ACCUSED:
----------------------
1. M/S.BRAVURA FABRICA (P) LTD.,
BELGAUM MANUFACTURERS,CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL ESTATE,
UDAYAMBAG, BELGAUM,
REP.BY ITS, MANAGING DIRECTOR,
RAJKUMAR G.MURUAKIBHAVI.
2. MR.RAJKUKAR G.MURUAKIBHAVI,
MANAGING DIRECTOR,M/S.BRAVURA FABRICA (P) LTD.
BELGAUM MANUFACTURERS,CO-OPERATIVE INDUSTRIAL
ESTATE,UDAYAMBAG,BELGAUM.
3. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.LALIZA.T.Y.
THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
17-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
V.K.MOHANAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
Crl.A.No.1365 of 2006
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 17th day of October, 2012
JUDGMENT
Though the above appeal pertains to the year 2006 and posted in the defects list today, there is no representation for the appellant.
2. Adv. Sri. Babu Cherukara, the counsel, who was appearing for the respondent/accused before the trial court, submitted that, though he had received copy of appeal memorandum and notice as directed by this Court, he has no instruction from the respondent/accused and requested that his name may be removed from the cause title, especially when he has not filed vakalath. The above request is allowed.
Though this Court by order dated 17/09/2012 granted time as sought for by the counsel to take steps to serve notice by way of substitute service by publication of notice in the newspaper, no step is seen to have taken in this regard and the counsel for the appellant is also absent. In the above circumstances, the above appeal is dismissed for non- prosecution.
V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE skj