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 26TH JUNE 2009 / 5TH ASHADHA 1931 WA.No. 1249 of 2009 ------------------------------------ AGAINST ORDER IN IA 5961/2009 IN WPC.32485/2007 Dated 12/06/2009 .................... APPELLANT/3RD RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------- THE FEDERAL BANK LIMITED, HAVING ITS REGISTERED OFFICE AT ALUVA, REP. 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, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 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 (SR.) & ADV.VIVEK VARGHESE THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/06/2009, ALONG WITH WP(C) 32485 OF 2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & Kurian Joseph, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1249 of 2009 & W.P.(C) No.32485 of 2007-P ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 26th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. This writ appeal arises from an interim order dated 12th June, 2009 in I.A.No.5961 of 2009 in W.P.(C) No.32485 of 2007. The learned Single Judge directed the appellant who is the third respondent in the writ petition to produce certain documents. When the writ appeal came up before us on 24.6.2009, we directed the appellant to make available the records in a sealed cover for perusal of the learned Single Judge. It is submitted that the records have been thus produced. 2. When the matter came up before us today, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing on both sides that the writ petition itself can be called for and disposed of along with the writ appeal and hence by consent of the parties, we have called for W.A.No.1249 of 2009 - 2 - the writ petition and the same is also disposed of along with the appeal. 3. The prayer in the writ petition reads as follows: “to issue a writ of mandamus, other appropriate writ, order or direction compelling the respondents 1 and 2 to dispose of Ext.P3 complaint/representation dated 29/6/2006 submitted by the petitioner to them by conducting an enquiry into the affairs of the 3rd respondent bank and taking appropriate action thereon within a reasonable time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.” 4. Having heard learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant, learned senior counsel appearing for the Reserve Bank of India and the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, we are of the view that this Court at this stage need not express any opinion as to the merits of the case and it will be sufficient if the writ petition itself is disposed of directing the second respondent in the writ petition to look into Ext.P3 with W.A.No.1249 of 2009 - 3 - notice to the writ petitioner and the appellant herein and pass appropriate orders thereon in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. The needful as above shall be done within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In that view of the matter we leave open all the questions raised in the writ petition as well as the writ appeal. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice Kurian Joseph, Judge vns