Jojin K Joseph vs State of Kerala - Public Prosecutor, Kottayam — 100026/2024
Case under Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 Section 138,142. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED on 16th March 2026.
Crl.RP - REVISION PETITION (CRIMINAL)
CNR: KLKT010042132024
e-Filing Number
15-11-2024
Filing Number
105259/2024
Filing Date
15-11-2024
Registration No
100026/2024
Registration Date
15-11-2024
Court
Principal District & Sessions Court / Rent Control Appellate Authority, Kottayam
Judge
5-Addl District and Sessions Judge-V / Addl MACT-III, Kottayam
Decision Date
16th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--ALLOWED
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Jojin K Joseph
Adv. LIJESH GOPALAN
Respondent(s)
State of Kerala - Public Prosecutor, Kottayam
Sandhya P
Hearing History
Judge: 5-Addl District and Sessions Judge-V / Addl MACT-III, Kottayam
Disposed
For Deposit of Cost
Order/Judgement
For Further Hearing
For Hearing
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 16-03-2026 | Disposed |
| 04-03-2026 | For Deposit of Cost |
| 27-02-2026 | Order/Judgement |
| 20-02-2026 | For Further Hearing |
| 16-12-2025 | For Hearing |
Interim Orders
The Additional Sessions Judge allowed Jojin K Joseph's revision petition challenging dismissal of his delay-condonation application for a Section 138 NI Act complaint, but imposed strict conditions: deposit Rs. 2,000 with District Legal Services Authority within 10 days, then pay the originally ordered Rs. 2,500 costs to respondent Sandhya P within two weeks. The court balanced justice on merits against compensating the respondent for petitioner's laches in missing the cost payment deadline. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
The Additional Sessions Judge allowed Jojin K Joseph's revision petition challenging dismissal of his delay-condonation application for a Section 138 NI Act complaint, but imposed strict conditions: deposit Rs. 2,000 with District Legal Services Authority within 10 days, then pay the originally ordered Rs. 2,500 costs to respondent Sandhya P within two weeks. The court balanced justice on merits against compensating the respondent for petitioner's laches in missing the cost payment deadline. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts