The High Court of Kerala disposed of a contempt petition as unnecessary after the Executive Officer took possession of temple properties, dropping the proceedings though expressing that safety concerns should be addressed elsewhere.
Contempt proceedings dropped; petitioner directed to approach appropriate forum for safety relief.
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 4TH JUNE 2007 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 633 of 2007(S) -----------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.21302/2006 ....................
PETITIONER/PETITIONER
P.MOHANDAS, ADOLI HOUSE, THIRUTHIYAD, PUTHIYARA P.O., CALICUT DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NADAKKAVU POLICE STATION, NADAKKAVU, KOZHIKODE.
S/O.DAMODARAN NAIR, AGED 61 YEARS, SECRETARY, AZHAKODI DEVI CHARITABLE TRUST, THIRUTHIYAD, PUTHIYARA, KOZHIKODE-4.
FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, CHAIRMAN BOARD OF TRUSTEES, AZHAKODY DEVI TEMPLE, THIRUTHIYAD, KOZHIKODE.
BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.MEERA
SRI.P.NARAYANAN
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J.
Cont.Case (C) No.633 of 2007 -----------------------------------------Dated, this the 4th day of June, 2007
JUDGMENT
H.L.Dattu, C.J.
The complainant in this petition filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India has brought to our notice that the respondents have willfully and deliberately disobeyed the orders and directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No.21302 of 2006 dated 9th October, 2006.
the following directions. The same reads as under:
“We find no reason to take a different view from the factual finding entered into by the Deputy Commissioner as well as the Commissioner, HR & CE, in the facts and circumstances of this case. We are inclined to give a direction to the 7th respondent to hand over possession of the management of the temple properties to the 6th respondent forthwith, in any case on or before 16.10.2006, failing which, the 6th respondent, Executive Officer, Azhakodi Devi Temple, Thiruthiyad, Kozhikode can assume management of the temple properties with the aid of respondents 1 and 2. The Executive Officer is directed to maintain separate account with regard to the management of the properties, after assuming charge.”
2
submit that some of the trustees are trying to manhandle the petitioner and his life is in danger. If that is so, the petitioner has to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate reliefs. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings are dropped. Ordered accordingly.
( H.L.DATTU)
CHIEF JUSTICE
(K.T.SANKARAN) JUDGE
vns
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to continue contempt proceedings after the lower respondent claimed possession of temple properties.
Whether the petitioner is facing manhandling by trustees.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
P.Mohandas
Mr.P.K.Santhosh
Mr.B.K.Upadiaya
Mr.K.Vijayan Kidavu
Mr.M.Narayanan Kutty
Mr.KomalaRajan
H.L.Dattu
K.T.Sankaran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
