Petitioners filed a contempt petition alleging disobedience of court orders. The Court rejected the petition as the petitioner's counsel failed to identify any specific order that was disobeyed, preventing cognizance.
Contempt petition rejected on the ground that no specific disobeyed order was identified.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN
THURSDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2007 / 31ST JYAISHTA 1929
Con.Case(C).No. 126 of 2007(S)
AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.1885/2005 Dated 19/10/2005
PETITIONERS: PETITIONERS 2 AND 9:
BY ADV. SRI.T.K.MARTHANDAN UNNITHAN SRI.V.JAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENTS:
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN,J.
---------------------------------------------------CONT. CASE (CIVIL) NO. 126 OF 2007
Dated this the 21st June, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L.DATTU, C.J .
Petitioners complain that the respondents in the petition have disobeyed the orders and directions issued by this Court and, therefore, they request us to initiate contempt proceedings as envisaged under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Court Act.
Ordered accordingly.
(H.L.DATTU) Chief Justice
(K.T.SANKARAN) Judge
ahz/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Court can take cognizance of a contempt petition when the petitioner fails to identify the specific order disobeyed.
SUNDURAJAN P.
INDU R.
SIVAJA DAS
RAVEENDRANATHAN NAIR
JOLY MATHEW
H.L.DATTU
K.T.SANKARAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
