Disposed
Shijin.P.K. v. Sri.Jabbar
Kerala HCCon.Case(C)/115/2009
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT :…
What the court decided
AI extract
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 HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 13TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 24TH MAGHA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 115 of 2009(S) -----------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.21008/2008 Dated 07/11/2008 ....................
PETITIONER(S):
SHIJIN P.K., S/O. SREEDHARAN, AGED 22 1ST YEAR MBBS STUDENT KANNUR MEDICAL COLLEGE, KANNUR (RESIDING AT SREERAGAM P.O., MUZHAPPILANGAD KANNUR.
BY ADV. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
RESPONDENT(S):
ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE FOR R1-2 SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) FOR R1-2
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
P.N. RAVINDRAN, J.
Cont. Case (C) No. 115 OF 2009
Dated this the 13th day of February, 2009
J U D G M E N T
In view of the order passed by the Admission Supervision Committee for Professional Colleges on 27.1.2009, with the consent of parties and the interim order passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.21008 of 2008 on 12.2.2009, Annexure-I order stands varied and cannot continue to operate as regards the fee payable by the petitioner. I, therefore, find no grounds to proceed with this Contempt Case. It is accordingly closed with the observation that the parties will be governed by the interim order passed on 12.2.2009 in W.P.(C) No.21008 of 2008.
Sd/- (P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE)
aks
// TRUE COPY //
P.A. TO JUDGE
Shijin P.K.
Jabbar, The Manager, Kannur Medical College
The Chairman, Prestige Educational Trust
P.N. Ravindran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court