Disposed

Dr. Kunjamma George v. Dr. Bhaskaran

Kerala HC27 Mar 2008Con.Case(C)/237/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a civil contempt case, the High Court of Kerala recorded that the petitioner sought time for taking charge and respondents assured compliance of directions. The court accepted these submissions for the present but noted the right to approach the court again.

What did the court decide?

The contempt of court case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move again.

Dr. Kunjamma George Vs Dr. Bhaskaran — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2008 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1930

¶4

Con.Case(C).No. 237 of 2008(S) -----------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.38581/2002 Dated 03/07/2007 .................... PETITIONER: --------------------

¶5

DR. KUNJAMMA GEORGE, W/O. GEORGE, AGED 61 YEARS, PROFESSOR IN MEDICINE, ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES HOSPITAL, PARIYARAM, KANNUR DISTRICT, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.28/3083, TAGORE NAGAR, PONNIATH CROSS ROAD, KADAVANTHARA, COCHIN-20.

¶6

BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SRI.T.S.SHYAM PRASANTH

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

------------------------

¶9

1. DR. BHASKARAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DIRECTOR, ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES, PARIYARAM, KANNUR-670502.

¶10

2. SHRI K.KARUNAKARAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL COMPLEX AND ACADEMY OF MEDICAL SCIENCES,PARIYARAM, KANNUR-670502.

¶11

3. SHRI JIJI THOMAS, IAS, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶12

BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH

¶13

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Kss

¶15

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.

¶16

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

¶17

Cont.Case(C).No.237 of 2008-S

¶18

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 27th day of April, 2008.

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The learned counsel for the respondents states that an order as regards appointment was issued and the petitioner is due to take charge for which she has sought for time. It is also pointed out that the other directions in the judgment are being complied with for releasing consequential benefits and that the matter would be settled amicably without delay. This is recorded and this contempt of court case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move again, if needed.

¶21

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/020408

Dr. Kunjamma George v. Dr. Bhaskaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Kunjamma George v. Dr. Bhaskaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malabar Regional Co-Op.Milk Producers Vs M.Sulaiman

E.M.Joseph Vs the Hindustan Machine Tools (Hmt)

Chamiyar Vs the Deputy Director of Dairy & Others

P.K.Mohammed Basheer Vs State of Kerala

Bsnl, Rep.by the Divisional Manager Vs Deputy Chief Engineer, Kseb

Joint Registrar of Co-Op.Societies,Ekm. Vs Dr.M.C.George,Infarm-National Trustee