T.R.Valsan v. Shri.a.P.M.Muhammed Haneesh & Others
Case brief
What is this about?
In a contempt petition, the petitioner alleged disobedience of an order to determine property value. The court found that respondents had belatedly issued an order fixing the value. The dismissal was without prejudice to the petition's right to challenge the compensation quantum.
What did the court decide?
The contempt case is closed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to challenge the quantum of compensation.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR
THURSDAY, THE 3RD JANUARY 2008 / 13TH POUSHA 1929
Con.Case(C).No. 1735 of 2007(S)
------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.9782/2002 Dated 19/10/2005
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN O.P.:
------------------------------------------
T.R.VALSAN ,S/O. LATE RAMAKRISHANAN, THATTARUPARAMBIL HOUSE, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O., NORTH PARUR.
BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO
RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS IN O.P.:
----------------------------------------------
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to proceed with a contempt case when respondents have belatedly complied with the earlier order to determine property value.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
T.R.VALSAN
- respondent
SHRI.A.P.M.MUHAMMED HANEESH
- respondent
REMA DEVI
- respondent
JOSEPH
- respondent
K.N.RAJI
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court