Mumtaz v. Bai Singh
Case brief
What is this about?
In a contempt proceeding under O.P.(Civil) No.1160 of 2011, the court grant one month to the respondent Deputy Collector to trace missing records and comply with a prior judgment, warning of consequences for default.
What did the court decide?
Time of one month granted to the respondent to trace records and comply with the previous judgment of 16.08.2011.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2012/3RD SRAVANA 1934
Con.Case(C).No. 1059 of 2012 (S) IN OPC/1160/2011 -------------------------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OPC.1160/2011 DATED 16-08-2011
PETITIONER(S):
1. MUMTAZ, AGED 30 YEARS D/O.AHMED KUTTY KARUTHEDATH KOTTOOR TIRUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
2. K.IBRAHIM
KARUTHEDATH INDANOOR KOTTOOR TIRUR MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT(S):
BAI SINGH (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS) DEPUTY COLLECTOR & APPELLATE AUTHORITY (LAND REFORMS) KANNUR-673001
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the time granted to the respondent to trace missing records is sufficient to comply with the earlier order.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Mumaz and K.Ibrahim
- respondent
Bai Singh
Coram
Thomas P. Joseph
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court