The Kerala High Court dismissed the contempt petition at the admission stage. The Court held that the petitioner failed to state the aggrieved persons charged higher rates, leaving such complaints to the appropriate authorities.
The contempt case was closed without entertaining it due to lack of material facts.
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 C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH AUGUST 2011 / 13TH SRAVANA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 726 of 2011(S) -----------------------------ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.18546/2009 Dated 23/02/2010
PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER IN THE WPC
-----------------------------------JAGRATHA SAMITHI, REG.NO.333/2000, CITY NAGAR-30, CHINNAKKADA, KOLLAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MR. KUZHIYOM MURALI, S/O. NARAYANAN PILLAI, AGED 60, R/AT THADATHIVILA KIZHAKKATHIL, KUZHIYOM, CHEMMAKKAD P.O., KOLLAM.
BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL SRI.SAIJU S. SRI.T.PRASAD
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS 4 TO 6 IN THE WPC
-------------------------------------------1. SRI. JOSEPH, FATHER'S NAME AND AGED NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM-691 013.
FATHER'S NAME AND AGED NOT KNOWN TO THIS
PETITIONER, A.A.RAHIM MEMORIAL DISTRICT HOSPITAL,
KOLLAM, MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN (PRESIDENT, KOLLAM JILLA PANCHAYATH, THEVALLY, KOLLAM-691 009).
MR.B.KRISHNA MANI, FOR R5
MS.K.MEERA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
COC NO.726/2011
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE-1 : COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 23/02/2010 IN WP(C) NO.18546/2009 OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
ANNEXURE - II : COPY OF NOTICE NO.M2-32075/2010 DATED 30/11/2010 ISSUED BY R1.
ANNEXURE-III : COPY OF NOTICE DATED 01/10/2010 SENT BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH HIS COUNSEL.
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE.
jg
C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ.
COC No.726 of 2011
Dated this the 4th day of August, 2011.
J U D G M E N T
Ramachandran Nair, J.
Heard the contempt petitioner at the admission stage. Learned Government Pleader on behalf of the respondents has denied the allegations. We do not find any material to entertain the contempt case because the petitioner has not stated the aggrieved persons, who are charged higher rates for the CT Scan facility availed at the CT Scan Centre started and operated by the 5th and 6th respondents in the Writ Petition.
Therefore, we close the Contempt of Court Case leaving freedom to victims who are charged excess amount to complain before the District Collector.
(C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE)
(P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE)
jg
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petitioner established material facts to entertain the contempt petition regarding alleged charges of excess rates.
Jagmatha Samithi
Joseph
Susan Mathew
Shyla Mony
P. Gopakrishna Pillai
Mr. B. Krishna Mani
C.N. Ramachandran Nair
P.S. Gopinathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
