The High Court of Kerala dismissed the writ appeal against an order declining to return seized documents. The appeal was disposed of as the court could not resolve disputed factual questions regarding originality of documents in a writ petition under Article 226.
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 ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF JUNE 2016/17TH JYAISHTA, 1938
WA.No. 1628 of 2013 IN WP(C).21479/2013
-------------------------------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21479/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 07.10.2013
APPELLANT/PETITIONER: -
BIJU MARKOSE, OJES BUILDERS, A.M. ROAD, NELLIKUZHI.P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.HARISANKAR V. MENON SMT.MEERA V.MENON SRI.MAHESH V.MENON
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS : -
R1 & 2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA.No. 1628 of 2013 IN WP(C).21479/2013
2
APPENDIX
APPELLANT'S ANNEXURE :
ANNEXURE A : COPY OF LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1st RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE : NIL.
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
DMR/-
ANTONY DOMINIC & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ.
---------------------------------------
W.A. No. 1628 of 2013
Dated this the 07th day of June, 2016
J U D G M E N T
Antony Dominic, J.
This appeal is preferred against the judgment of the learned Single Judge whereby the appellant's prayer for directing the first respondent to return the seized documents was declined.
W.A. No. 1628 of 2013 2
Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE
DMR/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether facts regarding originality of seized documents can be resolved in writ proceedings
Whether the High Court could direct return of documents based on documentary disputes
Scope of Article 226 proceedings in resolving factual controversies
BIJU MARKOSE
THE INTELLIGENCE OFFICER (IB)
STATE OF KERALA
ANTONY DOMINIC
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
