SUBBIAH SERVAI Vs. CHOKALINGA THEVAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In proceedings under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure M.R. Ry., P. Section Vasudeva Rao, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed a final order which included a direction that the counter-petitioner should pay the petitioner s costs. Within 3 days after the order of the 24th August 1910, two memoranda for taxing costs were put into Court by the petitioner s vakils. The Magistrate passed an order on the second of these memoranda "check and include" but through some negligence in the Magistrate s office, costs were not actually taxed.

(2.) Nearly 3 years later, the petitioner s son applied to the Magistrate s successor in office for costs being assessed, the petitioner having died in the interval.

(3.) The Magistrate has rejected his application on the ground (1) that the petitioner s son had not been brought on record as legal representative of his deceased father (2) that there had been great delay in applying.