Disposed

P.Ramanathan v. K.Balakrishnan Nambiar

Kerala HC23 Jun 2010Con.Case(C)/1560/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court disposed of a contempt case where the petitioner admitted receipt of amounts. The court clarified the dispute regarding government payment adjustment to the Library Council, ruling without prejudice to the Council's right to seek further payment.

What did the court decide?

The contempt case was disposed of without prejudice to the Library Council's right to seek payment from the Government.

P.Ramanathan Vs K.Balakrishnan Nambiar — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 1560 of 2009(S) ------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.21431/1999 Dated 05/11/2008 ....................

¶6

PETITIONER(S): ---------------

¶7

P.RAMANATHAN, S/O. APPUNNI, AGED 64 YEARS, ATTENDER, RURAL LIBRARY, PAROPPADY, MERIKKUNNU.P.O.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

¶11

K.BALAKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, (AGED AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) SECRETARY, STATE LIBRARY COUNCIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

ADDITIONAL 2ND RESPONDENT:

¶13

SRI.KURUVILA JOHN, SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPT., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

(R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A.NO.27/10 DTD.16.3.10) ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH FOR R1

¶15

GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.NARAYANAN

¶16

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

S.SIRI JAGAN, J.

¶18

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

¶19

Contempt Case (C).No. 1560 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 23^rd day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T

¶20

It is now admitted that the petitioner has already received the amounts as per Annexure A1 judgment. However, the learned Standing Counsel for the State Library Council submits that the Government has not paid that money to the Library Council as directed in the judgment, but they have paid the same to the petitioner from out of other funds of the Council. The learned Government Pleader submits that the Government has provided an amount of Rs.7 crores towards grant to the Library Council and the Library Council can very well adjust the amount paid to the petitioner against that amount. The learned Standing Counsel for the Library Council points out that these amounts are not in respect of this particular payment to the petitioner, which has to be separately paid by the Government to the Council and that the said grant would have been payable even apart from the judgment.

¶21

Having heard both sides, I dispose of this contempt case without prejudice the right of the Library Council to seek payment of this amount also from the Government.

¶22

sdk+

¶23

Sd/S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE

¶24

///True copy///

¶25

P.A. to Judge

¶26

P.Ramanathan v. K.Balakrishnan Nambiar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Ramanathan v. K.Balakrishnan Nambiar

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

Satheesan.T.S Vs Mr.T.P.Sen Kumar

M/S.Goyal M.G.Gases Pvt.Ltd Vs M/S.Kerala Minerals & Metals Ltd.

Muthoot Hotels and Infrastructure Ventur Vs the Commissioner of Customs and Another

M/S K.N.Security & Allied Services Vs P.Jagadeesan and Another

K.Muraleedharan Vs State of Kerala and Another

Josichen Thomas Vs the Village Officer