The Kerala High Court dismissed a special leave petition against a trial court judgment. The court held that non-compliance with a clause to provide prior property documents under a sale agreement was a civil dispute, not cheating under Section 420 IPC, and ordered no interference.
The special leave application stands dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.THANKAPPAN
MONDAY, THE 5TH MARCH 2007 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1928
Crl.L.P..No. 27 of 2007()
------------------------C.C.NO.328/03 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, KODUNGALLUR
PETITIONER/COMPLAINANT:
MOIDEEN, S/O. BAVU HAJI, AYYARIL HOUSE, ERIYAD, KODUNGALLUR ( FOR ALI, S/O. BAVU HAJI, AYYARIL HOUSE, ERIYAD,KODUNGALLUR)
BY ADV. SRI.SHAHUL HAMEED MOOPPAN
RESPONDENTS: ACCUSED:
R1- BY P.P.SRI.P.RAVINDRA BABU
THIS CRIMINAL LEAVE PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.03.2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
K. THANKAPPAN, J.
-------------------------------------CRL.L.P..NO.27 OF 2006
--------------------------Dated this the 5th day of March, 2007.
O R D E R
This is an application for special leave to appeal against the judgment in C.C.No.328/2003 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kodungallur. The entire case of the petitioner/complainant is on the basis of Ext.P2 agreement by which it is agreed that sale of the property covered by that document will be completed and there was a statement in Ext.P2 that the prior document of the property in question will be given as and when required and as it received from the authorities. Non-compliance of that condition is alleged as an offence under Section 420 of the I.P.C. There is no allegation in the complaint that on the basis of that clause no property has been handed over to the petitioner/complainant or he had been cheated as defined under Section 415 of the I.P.C. The trial court had already considered the entire evidence and found that the clause contained in Ext.P2 regarding handing over of the prior document will amount to a civil dispute.
CRL.L.P.NO.27/2007 2
Accordingly, the special leave application stands dismissed.
K. THANKAPPAN, JUDGE.
cl
CRL.L.P.NO.27/2007 3
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the non-compliance of a clause regarding handing over of prior documents in a sale agreement constitutes cheating under Section 420 of the I.P.C. or is a civil dispute.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's finding that the matter is a civil dispute.
The propriety of dismissing a special leave petition against the acquittal/dismissal judgment in the trial court.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Moideen, S/O. Bavu Haji (and Ali, S/O. Bavu Haji)
State of Kerala
Kunju Moideen
K. Thankappan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
