Wp(C)/20785/2012 Of K.faizel v. Asst.commr. Of Income Tax

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2012/16TH BHADRA 1934 WP(C).No. 20785 of 2012 (W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.FAIZEL, PARTNER BLUE CHIP MINES AND INDUSTRIES, VEMBALATHPADAM, KALLIYAD P.O., SHORNUR, PIN - 679 122, RESIDING HOUSE NO.4/54(A) NEAR PROVIDENCE G.H.S.S., GANDHI ROAD, CALICUT, PIN - 673 001. BY (PARTY-IN-PERSON). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 014. CIRCLE-1, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 014. 2. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER, OTTAPPALAM, PIN - 679 101. OTTAPPALAM, PIN - 679 101. 3. THE MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, THOTTAKATUKARA BRANCH, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 108. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 108. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, FEDERAL BANK, ALUVA, PIN - 683 108 ERNAKULAM. FEDERAL BANK, ALUVA, PIN - 683 108 ERNAKULAM. 5. THE MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, ALUVA BRANCH, ALUVA, PIN - 683 101. ERNAKULAM. UNION BANK OF INDIA, ALUVA BRANCH, ALUVA, PIN - 683 101. ERNAKULAM. 6. THE GENERAL MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, RAIF GARDEN, 12/13 K.H.ROAD, KODAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI, PIN - 600 034. UNION BANK OF INDIA, RAIF GARDEN, 12/13 K.H.ROAD, KODAMBAKKAM HIGH ROAD, CHENNAI, PIN - 600 034. W.P.(C).NO.20785/2012-W: 7. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 014. 8. T.BABURAJ, MANAGING PARTNER, BLUE CHIP MINES AND INDUSTRIES,VEMBALATHPADAM, KALLIYAD, P.O. SHORNUR,PIN - 679 122, S/O.LATE C.THOMAS, AGED 63, RESIDING AT THOTTATHIL HOUSE, NEDUMBASERY P.O,ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 585. 9. THOMAS BABU,PARTNER BLUE CHIP MINES AND INDUSTRIES,VEMBALATHPADAM, KALLIYAD P.O., SHORNUR,PIN - 679 122, S/O.T.BABURAJ,RESIDING AT THOTTATHIL HOUSE, NEDUMBASERY P.O,ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 585. 10. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM,PIN - 695 001. 11. UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI,PIN - 110 001. R1 & R11 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,A.S.G OF INDIA,R5 & R6 BY SRI.A.S.P.KURUP, S.C, U.B.I, R2, R7 & R10 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-09-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).NO.20785/2012-W: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL PARTNERSHIP DEED DATED 08.01.2003. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE EXTRACT OF THE FIRM M/S BLUE CHIP MINES AND INDUSTRIES FROM OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,TRIVANDRUM DTD. 23/05/2012.FROM OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,TRIVANDRUM DTD. 23/05/2012. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF 6 ACCOUNT STATEMENT OPENED BY FRAUD AND MISREPRESENTATION.MISREPRESENTATION. EXHIBIT P4. PETITION SEEKING POLICE PROTECTION TO PALAKKAD S.P DTD.22/08/11. EXHIBIT P5. PETITION SEEKING POLICE PROTECTION TO PALAKKAD S.P DTD.18/11/11. EXHIBIT P6. LETTER FROM INCOME TAX INFORMING THAT THE PETITIONER IN NOT A PARTNER OF THE FIRM DTD. 21/09/11.PARTNER OF THE FIRM DTD. 21/09/11. EXHIBIT P7. LETTER SENT TO THE SALE TAX BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 12/08/11. EXHIBIT P8. LETTER FROM THE UNION BANK INFORMING THE FREEZING OF ACCOUNT DTD. 29/07/11.ACCOUNT DTD. 29/07/11. EXHIBIT P9. LETTER FROM FEDERAL BANK AGAINST THE FACTS DTD. 29/09/04. EXHIBIT P10.TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT NO.3304 DATED 17.11.2011 DTD. 17/11/11.17.11.2011 DTD. 17/11/11. EXHIBIT P11. TRUE COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT NO-1711 DTD. 26/06/12. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20785 OF 2012 --------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P7. LETTER SENT TO THE SALE TAX BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 12/08/11. EXHIBIT P8. LETTER FROM THE UNION BANK INFORMING THE FREEZING OF ACCOUNT DTD. 29/07/11.ACCOUNT DTD. 29/07/11. EXHIBIT P9. LETTER FROM FEDERAL BANK AGAINST THE FACTS DTD. 29/09/04. EXHIBIT P10.TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT NO.3304 DATED 17.11.2011 DTD. 17/11/11.17.11.2011 DTD. 17/11/11. EXHIBIT P11. TRUE COPY OF FIRST INFORMATION REPORT NO-1711 DTD. 26/06/12. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.20785 OF 2012 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 7[th] day of September, 2012. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking thefollowing reliefs: i)To issue a writ of certiorari calling for thedocuments leading to Exhibit P3 and ExhibitP6. ii) ii)To issue a writ of prohibition or any other writ,order or direction commanding therespondents 8 and 9 to restrain from the illegalbusiness running by respondents, which waswrong and without sanction of law.iii)Pass such other writs, order or direction as thisHon'ble Court deems fit, proper, just andnecessary in the circumstances of the case.iv)Pass such other writ, order or directioncommanding the respondent No.7 to giveprotection to the petitioner to enter the unitand discharge the duties as a partner of thefirm. 2. Evidently, a writ of prohibition cannot be granted by thisCourt as against the respondents 8 and 9 who are stated to bepartners along with the petitioner, of the firm namely, Blue ChipMines and Industries. 3. A reading of the writ petition shows that the petitioner'sgrievance mainly is that the respondents 8 and 9 are siphoningoff the firm's money illegally and the statement of accounts hasbeen produced along with the writ petition at page No.3. It isstated that the petitioner was not allowed to enter the unit withthe muscle power of the respondents 8 and 9. It is also averredin paragraph 2 that the employers in the unit are criminals andsince the poor petitioner had no option, he submitted twopetitions before the police. Other similar details are averred inparagraph 4 of the writ petition. 4. Evidently, a writ of prohibition can be issued only wheninferior court or Tribunal acts in excess of jurisdiction, in violationof the principles of natural justice etc. The remedy of thepetitioner is to approach appropriate forums to get a properadjudication. Writ Petition is not a proper remedy in respect of the matters highlighted by the petitioner. Leaving open the right of the petitioner to prosecute suchremedies, this writ petition is dismissed. smp T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIRJUDGE