Kerala High Court
K M Sudheer S/O K .K Muhammed vs State Of Kerala Represented By The ... on 29 February, 2024
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 10TH PHALGUNA,
1945
WA NO. 2165 OF 2023
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 30363/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
K M SUDHEER S/O K .K MUHAMMED, AGED 48 YEARS
PARTNER OF M/S. GLOBAL GRANITES, KALLUNGAL
HOUSE, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM.PIN-683 106 NOW RESIDING AT
C/O.MUHAMMED, CHATHANATTU HOUSE, VENGOLA P.O. ,
MINIKKAVALA, PONJASSERY , PERUMBAVOOR ,ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT., PIN - 683556
BY ADVS.
JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)
SABIR N.S.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO
THE GOVERNMENT, REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001
2 THE REGISTRAR OF FIRMS & REGISTRATION D.I.G
OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR OF FIRMS, VANCHIYOOR
P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
3 K.M.MUNEER, S/O. K.K.MUHAMMED, AGED 50 YEARS
MANAGING PARTNER OF M/S. GLOBAL GRANITES,
KALLUNGAL HOUSE, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM., PIN - 683106
WA NO. 2165 OF 2023
..2..
4 M.A.JAWAHARUDEEN, M.A.,LL.B (ADVOCATE & NOTARY)
K-60/1991, OPP. POLICE STATION, ALUVA,
ERNAKULAM, PIN - 683101
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.J.VARGHESE, SENIOR GP
SRI.G.SANTHOSH KUMAR (P)
SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WA NO. 2165 OF 2023
..3..
JUDGMENT
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
The appellant is the writ petitioner. He challenged the
dissolution of a firm by the second respondent - Registrar
of Firms and Registration DIG - as seen from Ext.P3. It is
apparent that the second respondent, acting upon a
request, dissolved the firm. The case of the appellant is
that he is a partner and he has not consented to the
dissolution of the firm. According to him, he was out of
country at the time of dissolution of the firm.
2. We are not going into the merits of the case at this
juncture. Learned Single Judge, without going to the
issue, closed the writ petition recording the submission of
the learned Government Pleader that criminal cases are
pending for the alleged fraud committed in dissolving the
firm.
3. We are of the view that an opportunity should be given to
the appellant by the second respondent. If any fraud has
been committed and the second respondent is satisfied
that fraud has been committed, necessarily, nothing
WA NO. 2165 OF 2023
..4..
prevents him from revoking his order. It is for him to
decide based on the materials to be placed before him
whether any fraud has been committed resulting in
dissolution of the firm. A post decision hearing would be
sufficient in such circumstances.
4. Thus, the impugned judgment is set aside. We order that
the second respondent shall afford an opportunity of
hearing to the appellant and the third respondent on the
grievance raised by the appellant. After hearing both, an
appropriate decision shall be taken either to affirm the
decision to dissolve the firm or to revoke the same.
Needful shall be done within a period of eight weeks.
The writ appeal is disposed of, accordingly.
Sd/-
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
Sd/-
SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
JUDGE
bka/-
