Kerala High Court
Nissam Abdul Rehiman Kunju vs Inspector Of Police (Sho) on 3 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1944
WA NO. 1440 OF 2022
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18590/2022 DATED 30.08.2022 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS IN TEH WP(C):
1 NISSAM ABDUL REHIMAN KUNJU,
AGED 50 YEARS
S/O. REHIMAN KUNJU, RESIDING AT KATHUNGAL PADA, NORTH
PO, KARUNAGAPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PARTNER, M/S.
PIONEERS TILES AND GRANITES, HEAD OFFICE IN BUILDING
NO. KSP/XIV/1383 & BRANCH IN KSP/V/687 PUTHIYAKAVU IN
KULASEKHARAPURAM, PIN CODE- 690544.
2 NISSAMUDEEN,
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. IBRAHIM KUTTY, VAYALIL THARAYIL, KATTILKADAVU
P.O., ADINAD SOUTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE- 690542.
3 ABDUL JUNAID S.,
AGED 40 YEARS
S/O. SUBERKUTTY, RESIDING AT PULIVELI VADAKKETHARA,
MUKUNDAPURAM P.O., MADAPALLY, CHAVARA, PIN CODE
-691585.
4 SHEMEER,
AGED 36 YEARS
S/O. YOUSAF KUNJU, KANDASSERIVADAKKATHIL, KATTILKADAVU,
KATTILKADAVU ADINADU SOUTH, PIN CODE -690542.
5 NAZIM,
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. YOUNUS KUTTY, RESIDING AT THOPPITHARA,
KATTILKADAVU, ADINAD SOUTH, PIN CODE -690542.
6 SUKESAR KAPAR,
AGED 46 YEARS
S/O. VISUNI KAPAR, APARTMENT NO.348/B, PADA NORTH,
KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE NO.690544.
7 ABDUL SALEEM,
WA NO. 1440 OF 2022
-2-
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O.SAINUDEEN KUNJU, CHANGAYIL VADAKKATHIL, ALUMKADAVU
P.O, NAMBARUVIKALA, KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM, PIN CODE-
690573.
8 CHANDRAN K.,
AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. KARUNAKARAN, PUTHEN KANDATHIL, ADINADU SOUTH,
KATTILKADAVU P.O., KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN -690542.
9 RAJARAM KAPAR,
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. RAM NARESH KAPAR, APARTMENT NO. 348/B, PADA NORTH,
KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE- 690544.
10 WASHIM FIRUZ,
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O.ABDUL MOJID, APARTMENT NO.348/B, PADA NORTH,
KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE -690544.
11 SALIM MIYAN,
AGED 52 YEARS
S/O. ALAUDIN, RESIDING AT APARTMENT NO. 348/C, PADA
NORTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE -690544.
12 SHOHIDUL ISLAM,
AGED 30 YEARS
S/O. RUSTOM ALI, RESIDING AT APARTMENT NO.348/C, PADA
NORTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE -690544.
13 HAFIJUDDIN,
AGED 29 YEARS
S/O. ABDUL MATALIB, RESIDING AT APARTMENT NO.348/C,
PADA NORTH, KARUNAGAPALLY, PIN CODE -690544.
BY ADVS.
P.V.VENUGOPAL
P.CHANDRASEKHAR
ANAND SANKAR
REGIMOL M.K.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN THE WP(C):
1 INSPECTOR OF POLICE (SHO),
WA NO. 1440 OF 2022
-3-
KARUNAGAPALLY POLICE STATION, PIN CODE NO. 691572.
2 COMMISSIONER OF POLICE (CITY), KOLLAM,
PIN CODE -691001.
3 CHITTUMOOLA NASSAR,
S/O. JAMALUDEEN KUNJU, KURUDANTE AYYATHU, (LEADER HEAD
LOAD WORKER INTUC), PIN CODE -691571.
4 YOUSUFF KUNJU,
KOCHAYYATHU VEETTILL, PUNNAKULAM ADINAD, (HEAD LOAD
WORKER OF INTUC, KULASEKHARAPURAM BRANCH).
5 POOKUNJU,
S/O. PAREED KUNJU, (HEAD LOAD WORKER OF INTUC),
KULASEKHARAPURAM BRANCH.
6 KERALA HEAD LOAD WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SRM ROAD,
ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-18, PIN CODE-682018.
BY ADVS.
T.GOPALAKRISHNAN
K.SIJU
SRI.SREEJITH V.S., GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.11.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 1440 OF 2022
-4-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN & C. JAYACHANDRAN, JJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------
W.A.No.1440 of 2022
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2022
JUDGMENT
K. Vinod Chandran,J
The writ appeal is filed against the impugned judgment which refused to
grant the prayer sought for by the petitioner on the ground that there is no
registered firm in existence. The specific contention of the appellants who
were the petitioners before the learned Single Judge was that they were
partners of a firm and that the loading and unloading carried out in the
premises of the firm was by the owners, meaning partners. They also relied
on Ext.P9 judgment of another Division Bench of this Court, which held that
partners, who are owners, having not been conferred with a right to seek Rule
26A cards, cannot be obstructed from carrying out the loading and unloading
in their own premises.
2. The Board and the union leaders - the party respondents, objected
on the ground that Ext.P1 is a sham document, especially since there is only
1% partnership for all partners except appellants 1 and 2. The licence is in the
name of the 1st appellant alone. Respondents are union leaders demanding
work and no pool worker has been impleaded. However, the learned Counsel
WA NO. 1440 OF 2022
for the appellants points out that even the registration under the GST Act and
all other documents show the firm being in existence and carrying on the
business. In the appeal, Annexure A1 has been produced, which is the
registration certificate issued by the Registrar of Firms. This document was
not produced before the learned Single Judge. If the firm is registered, then
the exact constitution of the partnership may not be very relevant. In such
circumstances, it would be appropriate for the appellants to move a review
before the learned Single Judge.
Writ Appeal is closed, leaving open all contentions before the learned
Single Judge.
Sd/-
K.VINOD CHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
uu
03.11.2022
WA NO. 1440 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WA 1440/2022
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF
REGISTRATION OF FIRMS ISSUED BY REGISTRAR OF
FIRMS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
