Disposed

P.C.Shibu v. K.Somarajan

Kerala HC15 Nov 2011Con.Case(C)/1085/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a contempt of court case where the High Court found that the respondent had complied with the previous interim order, rendering the contempt proceedings unsustainable. The court noted that the petitioners could challenge the compliance decision in appropriate proceedings but closed the contempt case.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings closed; liberty to petitioners to challenge the compliance decision.

P.C.Shibu Vs K.Somarajan — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 1085 of 2011(S)

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/12/2010 IN WP(C) NO. 36998/2010

¶7

PETITIONERS / PETITIONERS :

¶8

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

¶9

1. P.C.SHIBU, AGED 43, S/O. CHIDAMBHARAN, MACHINE OPERATOR, MATSYAFED NET FACTORY, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, RESIDING AT PEEDIKAKKAPARAMBIL, EDAKOCHI-682 006.

¶10

2. JOSEPH PAYAS T.G., AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. LATE JOHN JOSEPH, MACHINE OPERATOR, MATSYAFED NET FACTORY, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, RESIDING AT THATTASSERY HOUSE, NETTOOR P.O., ERNAKULAM-682 040.

¶11

3. P.M.ASHRAF, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.MUHAMED, MACHINE OPERATOR, MATSYAFED NET FACTORY, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, RESIDING AT POTTAPARAMBU, VENNALA P.O., KOCHI-682 028.

¶12

4. JOB YESUDAS V.M., AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.LATE V.I.MATHEW, MACHINE OPERATOR, MATSYAFED NET FACTORY, DR.SALIM ALI ROAD, KOCHI-682 018, RESIDING AT VELLANATTU HOUSE, KUMBALANGI P.O., PIN-682 007.

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.C.ANIL KUMAR

¶14

RESPONDENT :

¶15

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

¶16

SOMARAJAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MANAGING DIRECTOR, MATSYAFED, KAMALESWARAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶17

BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM, SC, MATSYAFED

¶18

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

¶20

...2/-

¶21

Con.Case(C).No. 1085 of 2011(S)

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE'S

¶24

ANNEXURE I : TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 14.12.2010 IN WPC NO.36998/2010. ANNEXURE II: TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 1.3.2011 IN WPC NO.6358/11. ANNEXURE III: TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 28.6.2011 SENT BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE RESPONDENT.

¶25

ANNEXURE IV: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD.

¶26

ANNEXURE V: TRUE COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE DATED 7.9.2011.

¶27

ANNEXURE VI: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 28.9.2011 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶28

ANNEXURE VII: TRUE COPY OF POSTAL COVER OF NOTICE DATED 28.9.2011.

¶29

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE'S :

¶30

ANNEXURE R1( a) : COPY OF THE ORDER NO. MFED/E4/76/09 DATED 29-10-2011.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

C.K. ABDUL REHIM,J.

¶35

Con. Case (c) No.1085 OF 2011

¶36

DATED THIS THE 15^th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2011

¶37

J U D G M E N T

¶38

This contempt of court case is filed alleging noncompliance of the directions contained in Annexure-I judgment. Learned counsel, who entered appearance on behalf of respondent, had produced Annexure-R1 (a), which is the proceedings issued by the respondent in compliance with the directions contained in the judgment.

¶39

Under the above mentioned circumstances, I am of the view that proceedings under the Contempt of Court Act is not sustainable.

¶40

However, the petitioners will be at liberty to challenge the decision taken, if they are aggrieved, in appropriate proceedings.

¶41

Therefore the contempt of court case is hereby closed.

¶42

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE.

¶43

AMG

¶44

True copy

¶45

P.A to Judge

P.C.Shibu v. K.Somarajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.C.Shibu v. K.Somarajan

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

N.Gopinathan Vs the District Collector,Trivandrum & Ors.

Mridul S.V Vs State of Kerala

Ramani.P.I Vs the Secretary,Vazhayaoor Scb and Others

T.P.John Vs Special Officer

Jija P.T Vs State of Kerala

Dr.B.Rajmohan Vs the State of Kerala