In a contempt proceeding for alleged non-compliance with custody directions, the High Court accepted the respondent's explanation and unconditional apology, disposing of the case without penalty while reserving right to file fresh proceedings on future breach.
Contempt case (No. 206 of 2007) and associated I.A.s disposed of; no penalty imposed.
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
MONDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2007 / 4TH ASHADHA 1929
Con.Case(C).No. 206 of 2007(S )
AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN MFA.1530/2001 Dated 13/07/2004 (JUDGMENT IN CON.CASE (C) NO.996 OF 2006 DATED 12.9.2006
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT
A.V.ROJER, S/O.AMBROSE, AGED 46 YEARS, NIRMALA BHAVAN, HOSPITAL JUNCTION, PARASSALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR
RESPONDENT: APPELLANT
J.JANET SUDHA, D/O.MARY JOSEPH, AGED 38 YEARS, SWADHINATHA, MADAVILAKOM, KOLLENGODU, KANYAKUMARI DISTRICT, TAMILNADU.
BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
CONTEMPT CASE (C )No. 206 OF 2007 ................................................................................... Dated this the 25th June, 2007.
J U D G M E N T
H.L. Dattu, C.J.:
Pursuant to the directions issued by us, the respondent is present
before us along with the children.
13th July, 2004, had issued the following directions:
August, 2004, has modified the earlier order . The modified order reads as under:
CONTEMPT CASE (C )No. 206 OF 2007
Kollangode Police Station, which according to the learned counsel is nearest Police Station, at 10 a.m. on second Saturdays and beginning of all the other holidays and respondent (mother ) either herself or by her representative hand over the children to the petitioner at that time. He shall return back the children at 4 p.m. on Sunday and last day of all the intervening holidays at the Police Station. The respondent need not go personally to the police station but her relatives can be authorised to take back the children at that time.”.
CONTEMPT CASE (C )No. 206 OF 2007
3
unconditional apology tendered by her.
5 of the affidavit, as under:
“It is further submitted that the respondent herein shall comply with the orders of this Hon'ble Court without any default hereafter, without prejudice to the right of this respondent to approach the competent court for modification of the order of interim custody.”
H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE.
K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE.
lk
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent is guilty of contempt for not complying with interim custody directions.
Whether the respondent's explanation and apology warrant discharge of the contempt proceeding.
Whether complainants maintain right to file fresh contempt if orders are breached again.
A.V. Roger
J. Janet Sudha
H.L. Dattu
K.T. Sankaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
