Dismissed

T.J.Jose v. Yogesh Gupta IPS

Kerala HC1 Oct 2012Con.Case(C)/1172/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Contempt of Court case was dismissed as the petitioner failed to establish sufficient grounds to proceed against the Kerala Financial Corporation. The court noted that challenging the merits of the Board meeting decision is not the purpose of contempt.

What did the court decide?

The Contempt of Court Case is dismissed as no sufficient grounds have been made out to proceed further.

T.J.Jose Vs Yogesh Gupta IPS — Kerala HC (2012) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/9TH ASWINA 1934

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 1172 of 2012 (S) IN WPC/13254/2011

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN .NO./ IN WPC.13254/2011 DATED 27-02-2012

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

T.J.JOSE, AGED 77 YEARS S/O.JOSEPH, THERMADAM HOUSE, CHEMBUTHARA PATTIKAD, THRISSUR.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR

¶10

SRI.P.C.GOPINATH SRI.S.A.ABDUL SALEEM SRI.M.R.DHANIL SRI.S.NANDAGOPAL

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

1. YOGESH GUPTA IPS,

¶13

FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER CHAIRMAN MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM ,TRIVANDRUM PIN695001

¶14

2. SMT.PREMILA V NAIR

¶15

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER DIRECTOR KERALOA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶16

3. SRI.V.G.NANDA GOPAL

¶17

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER DIRECTOR KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶18

4. SMT.INDUMATHI SRIDHAR

¶19

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER ( DIRECTOR )KERALOA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶20

5. SMT.LAKSHMY KYLAS

¶21

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER (DIRECTOR) KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶22

Con.Case(C).No. 1172 of 2012 (S) IN WPC/13254/2011 --2--

¶23

6. SHRI.K.S.SREENIVAS,. IAS

¶24

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER (DIRECTOR ) KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶25

7. SHRI.SANJAY GARG IAS

¶26

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER (DIRECTOR )KERALOA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶27

8. SHRI.RAVI JHA

¶28

AGE, FATHERS NAME AND ADDRESS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER (DIRECTOR )KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM PIN 695001

¶29

R1,R2,R4-R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI (SR.) R1,R2,R4-R6 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KERALA FINANCIAL COR

¶30

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

Con.Case(C).No. 1172 of 2012 (S) IN WPC/13254/2011

¶32

APPENDIX

¶33

PETITIONERS ANNEXURE

¶34

ANNEXURE 1	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C. NO.13254/2011 DATED
	27-02-2012
ANNEXURE 2	COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 8-6-2012

¶35

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES

¶36

ANNEXURE R1(a)	COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 3-8-2012 IN W.A. NO.959/2012
ANNEXURE R1(b)	EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD MEETING OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT HELD ON 21-8-2012
ANNEXURE R1(c)	COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 10-9-2012 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO.19124/2012

TRUE COPY

P.A TO JUDGE

SMM

V.CHITAMBARESH,J.

¶41

= = = = = = = = = = =

¶42

Cont. Case(C) No.1172 of 2012 = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = = Dated this the 1^st day of October, 2012

¶43

J U D G M E N T

¶44

The judgment dated 27-2-2012 in W.P(C)No.13254/2011 inter alia directed the Board of Directors of the Kerala Financial Corporation to consider the representation to be submitted by the petitioner within a period of two months from its receipt. The judgment in W.P(C) No.13254/2011 was affirmed by the Division Bench by judgment dated 3-8-2012 in Writ Appeal No.959/2012. The period of two months prescribed for consideration of the representation would therefore run from 3-8-2012 only.

¶45

The Board of Directors of the KFC have considered the representation of the petitioner in its hearing held on 21-8-2012. The extract of the minutes of the Board meeting held at 11 a.m on 21-8-2012 has been produced. The same reflects that the petitioner was afforded an opportunity of being heard. The correctness of the decision rendered therein has been

¶46

Cont. Case(C) No.1172 of 2012 2

¶47

challenged by the petitioner. W.P.(C)No.19124/2012 is admittedly pending challenging the decision taken in the Board meeting of the KFC. The correctness of the decision taken in the Board meeting is not a matter to be considered in this Contempt of Court Case.

¶48

No grounds sufficient enough to proceed further against the respondents has been made out.

¶49

The Contempt of Court Case fails and is dismissed.

¶50

V.CHITAMBARESH. JUDGE

¶51

smm

¶52

Cont. Case(C) No.1172 of 2012 3

T.J.Jose v. Yogesh Gupta IPS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.J.Jose v. Yogesh Gupta IPS

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gopalakrishnan Nair Vs Ramakrishnan Nair and Others

Shaji Kumar Vs Sheeja

L.Vinayan Vs T.S.Sobha

Kseb Rep. by Its Secretary Vs Radhakrishnan

Kerala Cricket Association Vs Kozhikode District Cricket Association

Kerala Cricket Association Vs Kozhikode District Cricket Association