Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 18 (0.22 seconds)Section 143 in The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [Entire Act]
Subramanium Sethuraman vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr on 17 September, 2004
Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 of the NI Act suo
moto writ petition (Crl. No. 2/2020) decided on April 16, 2021
has also categorically ruled that the judgements of the court in
Adalat Prasad (supra) and Subramanium (supra) had interpreted
law correctly and reiterated that there is no inherent power of the
trial courts to review or recall or to reviews of summons.
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 397 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 258 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag & ... vs Mst. Katiji & Ors on 19 February, 1987
In case titled Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs.
Mst. Kathiji, AIR 1987 SC 1353: (1987) 2 SCC 107, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down the following principles
for the application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act:-
K.M. Mathew vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 19 November, 1991
The
observation in the case of K. M. Mathew (supra) that no specific
provision of law is required for recalling an erroneous order of issue
of process was held to be contrary to the scheme of the Code in
Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal and Others9. It was observed therein
that the order taking cognizance can only be subject matter of a
proceeding under Section 482 of the Code as subordinate criminal
courts have no inherent power. There is also no power of review
conferred on the Trial Courts by the Code.
Adalat Prasad vs Rooplal Jindal & Ors on 25 August, 2004
The
observation in the case of K. M. Mathew (supra) that no specific
provision of law is required for recalling an erroneous order of issue
of process was held to be contrary to the scheme of the Code in
Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal and Others9. It was observed therein
that the order taking cognizance can only be subject matter of a
proceeding under Section 482 of the Code as subordinate criminal
courts have no inherent power. There is also no power of review
conferred on the Trial Courts by the Code.
M/S Meters And Instruments Private ... vs Kanchan Mehta on 5 October, 2017
7. Section 258 of the Code is not applicable to complaints
under Section 138 of the Act and findings to the contrary in Meters
and Instruments (supra) do not lay down correct law. To conclusively
deal with this aspect, amendment to the Act empowering the Trial
Courts to reconsider/recall summons in respect of complaints under
Section 138 shall be considered by the Committee constituted by an
order of this Court dated 10.03.2021.