J U D G M E N T

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. I.A. NO 1773 & 2006 OF 2011 Both these applications are filed by strangers. We are satisfied that they are proper parties to the writ petition and they are accordingly impleaded as additional respondents.

W.P.(C) No. 1372 of 2011 Petitioners in this writ petition are two companies and the officers of the first petitioner. Their complaint is that respondents 3 to 12 are unauthorizedly interfering with their business. Additional respondents impleaded as per separate orders issued today point out that they are the distributors of the goods dealt with by the petitioners. The respondents 3 to 12 who contest the writ petition say that they have made deposits with the petitioners and they even go to the extent of alleging that there are financial irregularities and petitioners are essentially running a money chain. We do not propose to go into such controversies since these are matters to be looked into by officials dealing with economic offences in the administration of the Union of India and State of Kerala or in other States where such activities take place. Therefore, without prejudice to respondents 3 to 12 bringing up such complaints be