Justice Antony Dominic dismissed a contempt petition regarding alleged disobedience of a 2010 writ judgment. The court held the cause of action was time barred based on Damodaran and therefore the petition was not maintainable.
The contempt petition was dismissed as not maintainable.
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 ANTONY DOMINIC
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF AUGUST 2012/12TH SRAVANA 1934
Con.Case(C).No. 1221 of 2012
-------------------------------------------------AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.31347/2010 DATED 13-10-2010
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:-
ABDUL SALIM,AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.VAVAKUNJULQBBA, 'LATHIF MANZIL', CHEMMANTHUR, PUNALUR.
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.BABU
RESPONDENT(S)/1ST RESPONDENTS:-
SRI.THOMAS P.J., (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM - 601 001.
BY SR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.MOHAMMED SHAFI
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
COC.NO.1221/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEX A1 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13/10/2010 IN WP(C)NO.31347/2010
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO.JUDGE
sts
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
-------------------------------------------------COC. NO.1221 OF 2012(S)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 3rd day of August, 2012
J U D G M E N T
This contempt Petition is filed on 31.7.2012 alleging disobedience of judgment dated 13.10.2010 in writ petition(c). No.31347/2010. By that judgment, the first respondent was directed to conclude the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 notice, at any rate, within 8 weeks of production of a copy of the judgment. As pointed out by this court in the judgment in Damodaran V. Cherkalam Abdulla (2007(2) KLT 171), the cause of action now urged by the petitioner is time barred.
Therefore the Contempt Case is not maintainable and for that reason it is dismissed.
(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE
vi/
WPC.No.
:2 :
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a contempt petition alleging disobedience of a 2010 judgment is maintainable when the cause of action is time barred.
Whether Article 141 of the Constitution or the 1976 Contempt of Courts Act applies to bar successive writ petitions.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Damodaran V. Cherkalam AbdullaApplied¶29
Damodaran V. Cherkalam Abdulla (2007(2) KLT 171)
ABDUL SALIM
SRI.THOMAS P.J.
DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
