Dismissed

Govindan v. K.R. Jyothilal

Kerala HC4 Apr 2011Con.Case(C)/229/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a closed contempt petition filed by a petitioner claiming non-compliance of a prior writ judgment related to ration card corrections. The High Court found that the directions in the earlier judgment had been complied with, dismissing the contempt petition without further proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition was closed with no orders against the respondents.

Govindan Vs K.R. Jyothilal — Consumer Protection | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 229 of 2011(S)

¶6

-------------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.32198/2010 Dated 21/10/2010

¶7

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

¶8

GOVINDAN, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O.KARIPPELIKUTTY, KARIKKANDAM, KANJIRAVELI, NERIYAMANGALAM.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.T.O.XAVIER

¶10

RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------

¶11

K.R.JOYTHILAL, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES (B) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

¶12

GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1

¶13

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs.

¶14

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶15

COC.NO.229 OF 2011(S)

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Dated this the 4^th day of April, 2011

¶19

J U D G M E N T

¶20

The Writ Petition No.32198/2010 was disposed of by judgment dated 21.10.2010 directing that it will be open to the petitioner to move the Government with appropriate representation for getting the mistakes in the ration card corrected and also requesting for shifting the location of ARD.No.109. Complaining that despite having made a representation, the judgment has not been complied with, the contempt petition has been filed.

¶21

An affidavit has been filed by the respondent which indicates that by Annexure-A4, directions have already been issued for issuing fresh ration card to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner complying with the other directions specified in that behalf. It is also stated that there are practical difficulties in sifting the location of ARD.No.109.

¶22

Irrespective of the merits of the decision taken, the fact remains that the directions in the judgment have been complied with and therefore I see no reason to proceed further with this

COC.No.229/2011

:2 :

contempt petition.

Contempt petition is closed.

¶27

(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE

¶28

vi/

Govindan v. K.R. Jyothilal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Govindan v. K.R. Jyothilal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ummer.K. Vs M.P.Kalyanikutty

Paulraj and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

Jiji John Vs M.G.University and Others

Muhammed C.K. Vs E.K.Gopalakrishnan

Syamala Vs Abdul Kalam Azad

Paily Vs Sri.Janjeeb Kumar Padjozhi