Dismissed

Saritha V.K. v. K.C. Satheesan

Kerala HC20 Oct 2011Con.Case(C)/378/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the petitioner's request to withdraw a contempt petition filed against the respondent based on incorrect facts. Consequently, the contempt petition was dismissed as closed and a prior order for a non-bailable warrant was recalled.

What did the court decide?

Request to withdraw the petition allowed; contempt petition dismissed as closed; order for non-bailable warrant recalled.

Saritha V.K. Vs K.C. Satheesan — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 378 of 2009(S)

¶6

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

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

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

¶9

SARITHA V.K., AGED 29, D/O.V.S.KAMALA, KAMALABHAVAN VENGALATH HOUSE, KUNNAMKULAM P.O., NOW RESIDING AT THARAYIL HOUSE, THARAYIL JUNCTION, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

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

¶13

K.C.SATHEESAN, AGED AROUND 50, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MANAGER, S.N.M.TRAINING COLLEGE, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 683516.

¶14

ADV. SRI.K.B.GANGESH

¶15

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

svs

¶17

COC. NO. 378/2009

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶20

ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC. NO.6589.2008.

¶21

ANNEXURE A2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.A. NO.2153/2008.

¶22

ANNEXURE A3: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN S.L.P.(C) NO.28324/2008.

¶23

ANNEXURE A4: COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶24

ANNEXURE A5: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 05/01/2009 OF THE REGISTRAR, M.G. UNIVERSITY TO THE RESPONDENT.

¶25

ANNEXURE A6: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 18/02/2009.

¶26

ANNEXURE A7: COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 16/03/2009.

¶27

RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE.

svs

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶32

¶33

Contempt Case(C) No. 378 of 2009 S ```````````````````````````````````````````````````````````

¶34

Dated this the 20^th day of October, 2011

¶35

J U D G M E N T

¶36

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

¶37

The contempt petition was filed against the respondent on the assumption that he is the present Manager. It is factually incorrect. Therefore, the petitioner seeks to withdraw the petition, without prejudice his right to file a fresh one. Request allowed. Contempt petition is dismissed as closed.

¶38

In view of the above, order dated 17.10.2011 directing issuance of non bailable warrant of arrest to the respondent will also stand recalled.

¶39

Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)

¶40

aks/20/10

¶41

// True Copy //

¶42

P.A. To Judge

Saritha V.K. v. K.C. Satheesan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Saritha V.K. v. K.C. Satheesan

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

St.Mary'S Jacobite Syrian Church Vs the District Collector, Collectorate

Reshma T.B. and Others Vs the Principal and Chief Superintendent&

Alex L.Abraham Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Shammy Thilakan Vs Sreekumar and Others

The Principal,Hahajubilee Training Colle Vs University of Calicut and Another

Tomy Sebastian Vs C.M. Thomas