The Single Judge closed a contempt petition alleging violation of a prior order by classifying the petitioner's bank account as NPA, finding no evidence of deliberate violation warranting further proceedings.
Contempt petition is closed.
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 ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 23RD MARCH 2009 / 2ND CHAITHRA 1931
Con.Case(C).No. 1691 of 2007(S)
------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.27563/2007 Dated 16/10/2007 ....................
PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS
BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT(S):
AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONERS, DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, UNION BANK OF INDIA, UNION BANK BHAVAN, P.B.NO.3667, M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-35.
BY SC SRI. ASP KURUP
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC,J.
CO(C).No.1691 OF 2007
Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2009.
JUDGMENT
This contempt petition has been filed on the allegation that, by again classifying the petitioner's account as NPA, the respondents have violated the directions issued by this court in Annexure-A judgment in WP(c).N.27563/07. A reading of the judgment shows that appreciating the facts as pleaded, this court held that the classification of the Petitioner's account as NPA was erroneous. After holding so, this court directed that a Superior Officer of the Bank should examine the case of the petitioner and consider whether the accounts are liable to be classified as NPA strictly following the guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank of India. It was in compliance of the direction that, after considering the materials available, Annexure-B order was issued.
CO(c).No.769/07
/2/
for the petitioner to agitate in a separate proceedings, which
the petitioner has done in WP(c).No.16689/08. On the materials produced I am not persuaded to think that any deliberate violation of the judgment has been committed, warranting further proceedings.
Contempt petition is closed.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE
vi/
CO(c).No.769/07 /2/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition warrants summarily dismissing for lack of deliberate violation of the prior order.
M.J.BETTY, M.J.TOMY
P.T.THOMAS, V.I.MATHEW
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
