P. Devaraj, Forest Contractor Vs. Chathu, Timber Merchan and ors.

P. Devaraj, Forest Contractor vs Chathu, Timber Merchan and ors.

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 08, 2010

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/903371

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/903371
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: K.M. Joseph and; M.L. Joseph Francis, JJ.
Decided On: Apr 08, 2010
Case Number: W.P. (C) No. 36667 of 2009 (C)
Subject: Criminal

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Key legal issue: Criminal
Acts & sections: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 156(3)

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

P. Devaraj, Forest Contractor

Advocate H. Badaruddin, Adv.

Respondent

Chathu, Timber Merchan and ors.

Advocate R. Parthasarathy, Adv.

Legal References

Acts: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 156(3)

Excerpt

- .....that the petitioner received phone calls and there is harassment by the fifth respondent, sub inspector of police. a counter affidavits filed by respondents 1 and 3 to which a reply affidavit also is filed.3. we heard the learned counsel appearing including the learned government pleader. learned counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 3 and 2 and 4 would submit that the petitioner has cheated them. they would further point out that they had approached the learned magistrate who has ordered investigation under section 156(3) of the cr.p.c. according to them, due to the intervention of this court, the investigation ordered by the magistrate is not being completed. learned government pleader also would submit that the magistrate has passed an order directing investigation under section 156(3) of the cr.p.c. he would further submit that crime is not registered in view of the orders passed by this court.4. having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, in view of the order passed by the magistrate, we do not think it appropriate for the writ court to hold up further action by the police in the matter. accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:respondents 5 and 6 will be free to proceed in accordance with law, pursuant to the direction of the magistrate, to complete the investigation in the matter. we further make it clear that it is open to the petitioner, if so advised, to challenge the proceedings of the magistrate before the appropriate forum.

Full Judgment

K.M. Joseph, J.

1. Petitioner has approached this Court alleging harassment by the respondents, in the matter of civil dispute between the petitioner and respondents 1 to 4, pursuant to Exts.P1 to Ext.P3 (a) and P3(b).

2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows:

Petitioner has supplied timber logs to respondents 1 to 4. Petitioner has not yet received the entire amount due from them. There is an arrear of Rs. 7,38,737/-. It is stated that the first respondent is having the sole responsibility to make the payment of arrears. It is also submitted that respondents 2 and 3 are duty bound to send C Forms to the petitioner for the timber logs received by them from the petitioner. There is reference to Exts.P1 and P2 lawyer notices. While so, it is stated that the petitioner received phone calls and there is harassment by the fifth respondent, Sub Inspector of Police. A Counter Affidavits filed by respondents 1 and 3 to which a Reply Affidavit also is filed.

3. We heard the learned Counsel appearing including the learned Government Pleader. Learned Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 3 and 2 and 4 would submit that the petitioner has cheated them. They would further point out that they had approached the learned Magistrate who has ordered investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. According to them, due to the intervention of this Court, the investigation ordered by the Magistrate is not being completed. Learned Government Pleader also would submit that the Magistrate has passed an order directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. He would further submit that crime is not registered in view of the orders passed by this Court.

4. Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties, in view of the order passed by the Magistrate, we do not think it appropriate for the Writ Court to hold up further action by the police in the matter. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of as follows:

Respondents 5 and 6 will be free to proceed in accordance with law, pursuant to the direction of the Magistrate, to complete the investigation in the matter. We further make it clear that it is open to the petitioner, if so advised, to challenge the proceedings of the Magistrate before the appropriate forum.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2010 Same Parties P. Devaraj, Forest Contractor vs Chathu, Timber Merchan and ors. Same Subject Criminal Same Judge K.M. Joseph and; M.L. Joseph Francis, JJ. Acts & Sections Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - Section 156(3)

Criminal