- Next story Fake case: Man acquitted of rapeJustice M Nirmal Kumar observed that the woman had admitted that she had lodged a false complaint in order to unite with her husband, who is the appellant. The judge cited that the appellant had also obtained divorce through the Sivaganga sub-court as the two had entered in a joint compromise. The judge further noted that the woman expressed her willingness to settle this issue. The judge further observed that as per the report of the radiologist, the woman was between 18 and 19 years of age at the time of the incident and hence the offence of rape would attract as per IPC section 376(i) as they had physical relationship with the woman with her consent.
- Previous story Setting aside the Thanjavur collector’s order which rejected an arbitration application on the ground that it was filed outside the prescribed period, the Madras high court held that there is no time limit specified for applying before the arbitrator under the National Highways Act, 1956. Justice S S Sundar observed that even otherwise if the Limitation Act, 1963, was applied in the case, the period prescribed under section 137, which is applicable in the present case, the appeal was filed well before time. “From the facts of the case in hand, this court is satisfied that the appeal had been filed within the prescribed time. Hence, this court has no hesitation to hold that the order passed by the collector dismissing the appeal on the ground of limitation is not only illegal on accounts of the judgements of the earlier division bench of this court, but also by accepting the case of the collector regarding application of Limitation Act,” observed the judge.