R. Dineshkumar vs A. Elakkiya — 542/2026

Case under Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 519. Disposed: Contested--Allowed on 29th April 2026.

Case disposed

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNTR010011322026

Filing Number

736/2026

Filing Date

07-Feb-2026

Registration No

542/2026

Registration Date

07-Feb-2026

Court

Principal District Court, Tiruvallur

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

29-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--Allowed

Last updated 20-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Section 519

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.R. Dineshkumar

    Adv. C. Nandha Kumar

  2. 2.D. Chitra

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.A. Elakkiya

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 29-Apr-2026

    Copy of OrderView PDF

    Summary The Principal Sessions Judge at Tiruvallur allowed the petitioners' application to condone a 90-day delay in filing a criminal appeal against their conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the delay was adequately explained by the petitioners' financial constraints and settlement negotiations, and noted that no prejudice would be caused to the respondent, who retained full opportunity to contest the appeal on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 29-Apr-2026

    Disposed

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  4. 17-Apr-2026

    Orders

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  5. 30-Mar-2026

    Enquiry

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  6. 11-Mar-2026

    Enquiry

    Principal District and Sessions Judge

  7. 07-Feb-2026

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  8. 07-Feb-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. 542/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Principal Sessions Judge at Tiruvallur allowed the petitioners' application to condone a 90-day delay in filing a criminal appeal against their conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the delay was adequately explained by the petitioners' financial constraints and settlement negotiations, and noted that no prejudice would be caused to the respondent, who retained full opportunity to contest the appeal on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case