IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2009 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1931 WA.No. 1101 of 2009 ---------------------------- AGAINST ORDER IN IA 5961/2009 IN WPC 32485/2007 DATED 23.5.2009 ----------------- APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------- THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER. BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,2 & 4: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. SMT.V.K.RADHAMANI AMMA, AGED 65 YEARS, W/O.K.A.NARAYANA PILLAI, KALIKURUMBATHARAYIL HOUSE, PADIVATTOM, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-682 024. 2. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS GOVERNOR. 3. THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGIONAL DIRECTOR. 4. SHRI M.L.FRANCIS, SENIOR MANAGER (VIGILANCE OFFICER), VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, HEAD OFFICE, FEDERAL BANK, ALUVA. R1 BY ADV.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH R2 & R3 BY ADV.SRI.JACOB VARGHESE & ADV.SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1101 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 29th day of May, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. This is an appeal filed against an interim order dated 23rd May, 2009 in I.A.No.5961 of 2009 in W.P.(C) No.32485 of 2007. As per the interim order, the learned Single Judge directed the appellant herein to produce the report dated 30.11.2006 submitted by the 4th respondent in the writ petition, in response to the representation dated 22.3.2006 filed by the petitioner before the Chairman of the third respondent Bank. 2. Learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant Bank submits that this order was passed without giving them an opportunity to file a counter affidavit in the petition. It is submitted that the investigation leading to the report is not based on the representation of the writ petitioner. Still further, the learned senior counsel submits that the report is an internal document of the W.A.No.1101 of 2009 - 2 - Bank. However, the Bank has no objection in making available the report to the court for perusal, without making the same as part of the records. 3. We find from the order that the learned Single Judge has only directed either to produce the document or file an affidavit. In that view of the matter, we do not think it necessary to interfere with the interim order. It is for the appellant to produce the document or file an affidavit as directed by the learned Single Judge. In that view of the matter, we need not go into the various contentions taken in the writ appeal. Therefore, leaving open all the contentions and without prejudice to the liberty of the appellant to file an affidavit within one week from today, the writ appeal is dismissed. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns