R. MURUGESAN Vs. THE SUBORDINATE JUDGE, NAMAKKAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this writ petition to quash the order dated 17.12.2015 passed by the learned Subordinate Judge, Namakkal in so far as it relates to the finding recorded therein that the learned Subordinate Judge is not empowered to deal with the present complaint purportedly about the non-joinder of the necessary party in the suit and to further direct the learned Subordinate Judge, Namakkal to conduct preliminary enquiry under Sec.340 of Criminal Procedure Code.

(2.) The brief facts which are necessary and essential for disposal of this writ petition are as follows:-

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently contend that the learned Subordinate Judge failed to exercise his judicial discretion in a proper perspective. The learned Subordinate Judge also erroneously held that the complaint given by the petitioner relates to non joinder of necessary party in the suit, which is factually incorrect. The fact remains that the complaint given by the petitioner relates to playing fraud on the court thereby crippling the administration of justice. Further, the complaint relates to fabrication and forgery of documents to ingeniously dispossess the petitioner. The complaint further relates to unauthorised dispossession of the petitioner from the leasehold property and causing theft of materials worth Rs.15,00,000/-. When such a complaint was given, the learned Subordinate Judge ought to have conducted a preliminary enquiry as contemplated under Section 340 and 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure instead of forwarding the complaint to the District Legal Services Authority for adjudication. According to the counsel for the petitioner, by the impugned order, the learned Subordinate Judge has exceeded his jurisdiction and travelled beyond the scope of the complaint.