Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 19333

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Sathish Ninan, P.Krishna Kumar, JJ
THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, KOCHI ZONAL OFFICE, KANOOS CASTLE, A.K. SESHADRI ROAD, KOCHI, PIN - 682011 – Appellant
Versus
KERALA INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT FUND BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, SECOND FLOOR, FELICITY SQUARE, MG ROAD, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001 – Respondent
WA NO. 3142 OF 2025 | WP(C) NO. 46555 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.JAISHANKAR V.NAIR, SC, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE
For the Respondents:SPL.G.P.SRI.V.MANU, SMT.ALKA WARRIAR, CGC, SHRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP, ADVOCATE GENERAL, SHRI.V.MANU, SPL.G.P. TO A.G.

The court dismissed the appeal as infructuous after the interim order had expired, emphasizing no determination on merits.

Headnote:This judgment relates to an appeal against an interim order of stay granted for a three-month period, which has since expired. The court deemed the challenge to the interim order as having become infructuous and suggested dismissal without addressing merits. Both parties agreed to this course of action. The urgency necessitated scheduling the associated Writ Petition for immediate hearing.

Table of Content
1. this appeal contests an expired interim stay. (Para 1)
2. court suggested dismissal as infructuous. (Para 2)
3. immediate listing of associated writ petition requested. (Para 3)

Sathish Ninan, J.

This appeal is filed against an interim order of stay, which was granted for a period of three months. The order of stay was passed on 16.12.2025. The period of the interim order has since expired.

Accordingly, the challenge against the interim order does not survive.

2. Concern was expressed to the parties as to whether it would be proper to hear the challenge against the impugned order when it has worked itself out. It was suggested to the parties that leaving open the contentions of the parties the Writ Appeal can be dismissed as infructuous. Both sides were not averse to such course.

3. Accordingly, without expressing anything on the merits and leaving open all the contentions of both sides, the writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

In view of the urgency raised by the parties, we request the learned Single Judge to list the WP(C)No.46555/2025 tomorrow, i.e., 19.03.2026 itself. Registry to take steps accordingly.

Sathish Ninan, Judge P.Krishna Kumar, Judge dlk/18.3.2026

Click Here to Read the rest of this document