Kerala High Court
Shiju Joseph vs Mony Mathew on 25 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
Thursday, the 25th day of August 2022 / 3rd Bhadra, 1944
WA NO. 1147 OF 2022
AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 31.03.2022 IN WP(C) 1455/2022 OF THIS COURT
APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION:
SHIJU JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH,AGED 52 YEARS,MUNDAKKAL
HOUSE,THIRUVAMKULAM,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 305.
BY ADVS.M/S. PAUL K.VARGHESE & GEETHA A.A.
RESPONDENTS/WRIT PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS NO.1 & 2 IN THE WRIT PETITION:
1. MONY MATHEW,S/O.MATHAI,AGED 50 YEARS,KARAVATEEKUZHIVELI
HOUSE,VADAYAMPADY,PUTHENCRUZ P.O.,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 308.
2. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMBASSERY POLICE
STATION,NEDUMBASSERY P.O.,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 111.
3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NEDUMBASSERY POLICE
STATION,NEDUMBASSERY P.O.,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-683 111.
BY ADV.SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL FOR R1
SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY FOR R2 & R3
This Writ Appeal coming on for admission on 25/08/2022 upon perusing
the appeal memorandum, the court on the same day passed the following:
P.T.O.
EXT.R3(d):A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY MY CONTRACTING
COMPANY FINANCE FABRICA LTD. DATED 29.11.2021.
---
ALEXANDER THOMAS & SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Writ Appeal No.1147 of 2022
[arising out of the impugned judgment dated 31.03.2022 in W.P.(C) No.1455/2022]
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2022
ORDER
It is brought to our notice that it is recorded in para No.6 of the
impugned judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge on
31.03.2022 in W.P.(C) No.1455/2022, which reads as follows:-
"6. The learned Government Pleader also submits, on instructions, that it
is on the basis of Exhibit R3(d) complaint received from the Manager of the
3rd respondent that the petitioner had been summoned and since the issue is a
disputed question as to ownership of the vehicle, the parties had been
relegated to their appropriate remedies and that nothing further is being
done by the police."
2. The competent authority among the 2nd & 3rd respondents
herein (Circle Inspector of Police & Sub Inspector of Police), will
immediately furnish instructions to the learned Senior Government
Pleader as to the aspects disclosed in para No.6 of the impugned
judgment in the W.P.(C) and as to whether any FIR was registered in
pursuance of Ext.R3(d) complaint and whether investigation was
completed before taking the stand that in view of the disputed questions
of the ownership of the vehicle in the matter, the parties will have to
seek appropriate remedies or whether, without registering an FIR, a
preliminary inquiry was conducted and the above factual conclusion
has been made, etc. Details as to how the above stand was taken on
Ext.R3(d) complaint and whether it is disclosed in any of the records
maintained in the Police Station concerned, like the General Diary
(GD), etc. may be disclosed and copy of such record should also be
made available, etc. A statement in the matter should be filed by the
competent authority among respondents 2 & 3, regarding these
details.
3. Sri.Sajeev Kumar K. Gopal, learned counsel appearing for
the 1st respondent herein/writ petitioner seeks time to file a
comprehensive affidavit in this appeal.
4. Permission granted.
List on 30.08.2022.
Hand Over a copy of this order to both sides.
Sd/-
ALEXANDER THOMAS,
JUDGE
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN,
JUDGE
Skk//25082022
25-08-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
