Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE7H DAY OF NOVEMBER201316TH KARTHIKA, 1935 WP(C).No. 26398 of 2013 (Y) ---------------------------- (CRMP.NO. 338/2013 OF ENQUIRY COMMISSION AND SPECIAL JUDGE(VIGILANCE), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) PETITIONER : -------------------------- C. KRISHNAN, S/O.LATE CHUDALAMUTHU CHETTIAR, AGED54YEARS, KOVIL VILAKOM HOUSE,TC29401, KOPRAPURA ROAD, KAITHAMUKKU, PETTA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024. BY ADVS.DR.V.N.SANKARJEE SRI.V.N.MADHUSUDANAN SMT.R.UDAYA JYOTHI SMT.K.S.SANDHYA MISS K.P NEETHA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISE LTD, PETTA BRANCH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER.
2. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (REVENUE RECOVERY), KERALA STATE FINANCIAL ENTERPRISE LTD., REGIONAL OFFICE, SILVER INSTITUTE BUILDING, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
3. C.M. MOHANDAS, S/O.LATE CHUDALAMUTHU CHETTIAR,AGED52YEARS, TC29374, THIRUVATHIRA,THENGAPURA, KAITHAMUKKU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024.
4. ABIDA BEEVI, W/O.LATE NOOHU KNNU, TC76792, KARTHIKA, ANAYARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 020. R1 & R2 BY SRI.ALEXANDER.C.V., SC, KSFE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0711-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts WP(C).No. 26398 of 2013 (Y) ------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED611.2012 ISSUED BY THE2D RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED162.2013 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SPECIAL JUDGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO.JUDGE sts HARUN-UL-RASHID,J.
------------------------- CRL.M.C.NO. 26398 OF2013------------------------- DATED THIS THE7H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2013 ORDER
Writ Petition is filed seeking a direction directing respondents 1 and 2 to defer Ext.P1 proceedings, till the disposal of Ext.P2 complaint. Petitioner lodged Ext.P2 complaint before the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram on 16/2/2013 as CMP.No.338/2013 against respondents 3 and 4. The Special Judge, Vigilance forwarded Ext.P2 complaint to the Vigilance and Anti- corruption Bureau for investigation. It is submitted that the investigation has already been initiated. The allegation of the petitioner is that while the 4th respondent was working as the Manager of the lst respondent, the 3rd respondent, who is the brother of the petitioner, managed to open chitty account in the name of their father, without his knowledge or consent by fabricating false documents and forging his signature and that later the 3rd respondent with the assistance of the 4th respondent managed to avail loan from that chitty and further got the chitty amount disbursed to the 3rd respondent. It is also alleged that the 3rd respondent with the intervention of the 4th respondent made records to show that the property admeasuring 6.5 cents belonged to their father Chudalamuthu Chettiar was furnished as collateral security for amounts fraudulently received by the 3rd respondent from the lst respondent. The petitioner with his family has been residing in the house situated in the property. It is stated that Chudalamuthu Chettiar executed a Will bearing No.249/2000 on the file of the S.R.O., Vanchiyoor bequeathing 6.5 cents together with residential building situated therein belonged to him. Chudalamuthu Chettiar has altogether eight children including two sons and six daughters. Some of the legal heirs filed O.S.No.409/2008 before the 2nd Additional Munsiff's Court, Thiruvananthapuram seeking partition of the property and O.S.No.1787/2006 filed by the 3rd respondent before the very same court seeking partition of the property between the 3rd respondent and the petitioner on the basis of the father's Will was disposed of and the 3rd respondent preferred A.S.No.83/2013 before the Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The challenge is against the revenue recovery proceedings initiated by the authority. Taking into consideration the aforesaid facts and having regard to the contentions raised by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is for the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate Forum. Petitioner cannot approach this Court seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to defer Ext.P1, till the disposal of Ext.P2 complaint in the giving circumstances. Writ Petition is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to work out his remedy before the appropriate Forum. HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE. kcv.