IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2007 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 23816 of 2004(I) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------ THOTTAKKAT DISTILLERIES, MUPPATHADOM P.O., EDAYAR, ALUVA-10, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REP. BY PARTNER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI. K. DHANAKUMAR. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM SRI.S.SHARAN RESPONDENTS: --------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. LATHA THANKAPPAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) NO: 23816/2004 I APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1. COPY OF THE RETIREMENT DEED OF 3 PARTNERS. EXT.P2. COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE NEW PARTNER. EXT.P3. COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR SHIFTING THE DISTILLERIES UNIT TO GOVINDAPURAM IN CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. DT. 24/3/03. EXT.P4. COPY OF THE GO RT NO. 307/2000/ID DT. 3/5/00. EXT.P5. COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING DT. 15/12/99. EXT.P6. COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES & COMMERCE, DT. 10/6/2003. EXT.P7. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO. 21897/03 DT. 8/6/04. EXT.P8. COPY OF THE LETTER DT. 30/06/04 BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R1. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS NIL. True copy tga KURIAN JOSEPH J. ---------------------------------------------- Writ Petition (Civil) No.23816 of 2004 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 22nd November, 2007. J U D G M E N T Petitioner approached this court with grievances regarding certain claims from the 4th respondent. From the nature of the pleadings, and in view of the disputed questions of fact involved in the case, it is only appropriate that the petitioner pursues the ordinary remedy before the civil court. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of without prejudice to the liberty to the petitioner as above, in which event, the time taken for prosecuting the writ petition shall stand excluded while computing the period of limitation. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs