Kerala CPI(M) leader refutes allegations in legal notice sent by Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan’s law firm

CPI(M) Ernakulam district secretary C.N. Mohanan denies all allegations and rejects demand for ₹2.5 crore compensation in legal notice from Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan's law firm. Mohanan claims he only demanded investigation into Kuzhalnadan's false statements and financial irregularities. He denies making any accusations against the law firm. Kuzhalnadan accuses Mohanan of making retreat and publicly humiliating him. He vows to continue fight and take legal action.

Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)] Ernakulam district secretary C.N. Mohanan has denied all allegations against him and rejected the demand for a compensation of ₹2.5 crore in a legal notice issued to him by KMNP Law, a law firm of which Congress MLA Mathew Kuzhalnadan is a partner.

The law firm had shot off the legal notice for civil and criminal defamation against Mr. Mohanan in August for allegedly making “highly malicious and wilfully defamatory statements” about it during a press conference on August 15, 2023.

The reply notice dated September 11 filed through lawyer C.K. Sasi of the Delhi-based law firm CK & Tripathi Associates said that the legal notice was based on an erroneous premise that Mr. Mohanan had raised allegations against the law firm in his press conference. He had only demanded a comprehensive investigation by an appropriate agency about the false statements made by Mr. Kuzhalnadan in his declaration before the Election Commission and financial irregularities evident from the said declaration, the reply said.

“My client has demanded a detailed investigation about these inconsistent declarations and statements that disclosed unusual monetary transactions which prima facie attract the offence of money laundering, evasion of stamp duty and grave violations of law, the details of which are either to be explained by Dr. Mathew Kuzhalnadan or the truth is to be found out by a competent investigating agency for which my client has approached the competent authorities as well,” the reply notice said.

The notice further claimed that the charges against Mr. Kuzhalnadan do not constitute allegations against the law firm simply because he happened to be a partner of the firm. “My client has never made any accusation, imputation or allegations as against your client (the law firm) as he has no reason or occasion to make any such allegations.”

Mr. Mohanan, the notice said, “had no knowledge about the law firm except from the statements made by Mr. Kuzhalnadan in his declaration submitted before the Election Commission. This being the position, there is not even an iota of merit, basis or bona fides in the allegations made in the notice that my client has made defamatory statements against your firm. My client has also not made any statement that your client has a branch office in Dubai.”

The notice went on to accuse Mr. Kuzhalanadan of making derogatory remarks against full-time politicians to the effect they were unaware of the value of sweat or hard work. It further alleged that “part-time politicians” such as Mr. Kuzhalnadan enjoyed their comforts at the cost of dedicated full-time workers/leaders.