Freddy K.Jose vs M/S.Yellow Express Logistics Limited
2024 Latest Caselaw 32576 Ker

Kerala High Court

Freddy K.Jose vs M/S.Yellow Express Logistics Limited on 11 November, 2024

                                               2024:KER:84325

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

 MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 20TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                   WP(C) NO. 6707 OF 2020

PETITIONER:
          FREDDY K.JOSE
          AGED 39 YEARS
          S/O.JOSE K.DOMINIC,
          PULIMAKKAL (KURISSUMOOTTIL),
          ANAKKAL.P.O.,
          KANJIRAPALLY, KOTTAYAM-686508.

         BY ADVS.
         ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH
         SRI.E.MOHAMMED SHAFI
         SRI.PRAJIT RATNAKARAN
         SHRI. RAJ CAROLIN V.


RESPONDENTS:
    1     M/S.YELLOW EXPRESS LOGISTICS LIMITED,
          YELLOW AVENUE, NILAMANGALA, BANGALORE,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY AND
          BOARD MEMBER LAKSHMI S BABU, D/O.LATE BABU,
          RESIDING AT B-16, SISIRAM, STUDIO ROAD,
          NEMOM, TRIVANDRUM-695020.
    2     THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
          KANJIRAPALLY POLICE STATION, KOTTAYAM.
    3     THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
          ECONOMIC OFFENCES DIVISION, (ANNEX 2), ROOM NO.111,
          CARLTON HOUSE, PALACE ROAD, CID, BENGALURU-1.

          R2 - SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY,GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 11.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.6707 of 2020

                                    2


                                                            2024:KER:84325

                              P.M. MANOJ, J
                      -----------------------------------
                       W.P.(C) No.6707 of 2020
           --------------------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 11th day of November, 2024


                               JUDGMENT

It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was

directed to appear before the 3 rd respondent in connection

with a land deal, alleging some unauthorised money

transaction. In response to that, the petitioner was

represented before the 3rd respondent stating that he has

no involvement in the alleged offence against the

1st respondent and the money came to the account of the

petitioner herein in connection with the selling of land. He

had given sufficient explanation to the 3rd respondent.

2. The petitioner could not secure any interim order in

his favour. Moreover, after passage of time, it appears that no

further grievance is brought before this Court in the same case.

That itself shows that no further orders are required in this case.

Accordingly, the writ petition is closed.

Sd/-

P.M.MANOJ JUDGE sss

2024:KER:84325

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6707/2020

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE AGREEMENT DATED 22.4.19.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 13.12.19 GIVEN BY THE FATHER AND MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED NIL BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.32/CRM/EOD/CID/19 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 17.1.2020.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.32/CRM/EOD/CID/19 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 12.2.2020.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.