The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a criminal complaint and police inquiry. It was noted that the police had filed a refer report, leaving no subsisting complaint. The petition was therefore closed without prejudice to party rights.
The writ petition is closed without prejudice to the rights of any of the parties.
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.M.JOSEPH
FRIDAY, THE 1ST OCTOBER 2010 / 9TH ASWINA 1932
WP(C).No. 13525 of 2008(I)
---------------------------------------------CMP.342/2008 of J..F.C.M, KAYAMKULAM
PETITIONER(S): ----------------------
BY ADV. SRI.R.MAYA KRISHNAN
RESPONDENT(S):
WP(C).NO.13525 OF 2008
HOUSE NO.B-12, NTPC QUARTERS, NANGIARKULANGARA, ALAPPUZHA-690513.
R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI A.J. VARGHESE.
ADV. SRI.S.VINOD BHAT FOR R3
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
APPENDIX IN W.P.(C).NO.13525 OF 2008 I
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:
EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE AGREEMENT DT. 20.4.2006 BETWEEN THE 3RD RESPONDENT AND THE CO.
EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF REGD. A.D. LETTER DT. 10-11-2007 ADDRESSED TO 3RD RESPONDENT BY 2ND PETITIONER WITH ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
EXT.P3 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPIES OF CONTRACT NOTES 3. 10. 07, 8.10.07, 9.10.07, 10.10.07, 11.10.07 15.10.07 AND 16.10.07 ISSUED TO 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P4 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPIES OF PAGES OF LEDGER A/C. OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT W.E.F. 1.4.07 TO 10.11.07.
EXT.P5 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF NOTICE ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P6 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF CMP NO.342 OF 2008 – PRIVATE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AND TAKEN COGNIZANCE BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
PS TO JUDGE
K.M. JOSEPH, J.
-----------------------------------------
W.P.(C).NO. 13525 OF 2008 I
-----------------------------------------Dated this the 1st October, 2010 .
JUDGMENT
Petitioners have approached this Court challenging Ext.P6
and seeking a further direction not to proceed in terms of Ext.P6. Ext.P6 is the complaint filed by the third respondent.
Pleader on instructions submits that after investigation, the police have filed a refer report. In the light of this, the petitioners do not have any further subsisting complaint. Without prejudice to the rights of any of the parties, the Writ Petition is closed.
Sd/=
K.M. JOSEPH,
JUDGE
kbk.
//True copy//
PS to Judge
2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the complaint is to be disposed of in light of a refer report by the police.
Jamod
Deepak Kumar S.
Parthasarathy alias Kannan
Ignatius Kulirani
Joy
Murali Govind
K.M.Joseph
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
