K. Chellaiah vs Palani Advocate - E.T. Nandakumaran — 5301/2025

Case under Limitationact Section 5. Disposed: Uncontested--Allowed on 18th April 2026.

CRLMP - Criminal Miscellaneous Petition

CNR: TNTR010110052025

Case disposed

Filing Number

6974/2025

Filing Date

17-12-2025

Registration No

5301/2025

Registration Date

17-12-2025

Court

Principal District Court, Tiruvallur

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

18th April 2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--Allowed

Acts & Sections

LimitationAct Section 5

Petitioner(s)

K. Chellaiah

Adv. D. Raja

Respondent(s)

Palani Advocate - E.T. Nandakumaran

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

18-04-2026

Disposed

01-04-2026

Orders

12-03-2026

Counter

25-02-2026

Counter

07-02-2026

Counter

Final Orders / Judgements

18-04-2026
Copy of Order

Case Summary: 5301/2025 The Principal District and Sessions Judge at Tiruvallur allowed K. Chellaiah's petition to condone an 18-day delay in filing his criminal appeal against a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the petitioner's explanations—poor health and financial constraints preventing him from engaging counsel—to be probable and sufficiently explained, particularly given the relatively short delay period and the respondent's failure to contest the application. Applying the principle that delays should be liberally condoned to advance substantial justice absent gross negligence or bad faith, the court allowed the petition to enable the petitioner to pursue his appeal on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: 5301/2025 The Principal District and Sessions Judge at Tiruvallur allowed K. Chellaiah's petition to condone an 18-day delay in filing his criminal appeal against a conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The court found the petitioner's explanations—poor health and financial constraints preventing him from engaging counsel—to be probable and sufficiently explained, particularly given the relatively short delay period and the respondent's failure to contest the application. Applying the principle that delays should be liberally condoned to advance substantial justice absent gross negligence or bad faith, the court allowed the petition to enable the petitioner to pursue his appeal on merits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

Principal District Court, Tiruvallur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case