Disposed

Koyammakoya Chakkarakada v. Cheriyakoya M.K

Kerala HC16 Aug 2013Con.Case(C)/398/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt proceeding, the petitioner alleged non-compliance of a direction to pass orders on reference applications. The respondent admitted compliance for two petitioners. The court found the petition of non-compliance meritless and closed the contempt case.

What did the court decide?

The contempt case was closed as the allegation of non-compliance was found to have absolutely no merit.

Koyammakoya Chakkarakada Vs Cheriyakoya M.K — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2013)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013/25TH SRAVANA, 1935

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 398 of 2013 (S) IN WP(C).14003/2012

¶6

----------------------------------------------------AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 14003/2012 DATED 25.6.2012

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONERS 3,8 & 18 IN WPC :

¶8

KOYAMMAKOYA CHAKKARAKADA AGED 49 YEARS

¶9

S/O. ABDULLA, CHAKKARAKADA, ANDROTH

¶10

REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

¶11

MUTHUKOYA PUTHIYADAM, S/O. KOYAMMAKOYA, ANDROTH.

¶12

DR.SAYED KOYA PATTAKAL S/O. KANDETH ATTAKOYA, PATTAKAL, ANDROTH

¶13

REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER

¶14

MUTHUKOYA PUTHIYADAM, S/O. KOYAMMAKOYA, ANDROTH.

¶15

MOHAMMED SAYED

¶16

S/O. ATTAKOYA, ANDROTH

¶17

REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MUTHUKOYA

¶18

PUTHIYADAM, S/O. KOYAMMAKOYA, ANDROTH.

¶19

BY ADVS.SRI.V.P.MOHAMMED NIYAZ

¶20

SRI.K.RONALD JOSE

¶21

SRI.M.P.MUHAMMAD FAZIL

¶22

RESPONDENT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC :

¶23

CHERIYAKOYA M.K, AGED 57 YEARS S/O. KUNHIKOYA, THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR) UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATHI-682 555.

¶24

R BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN,SC,LAKSHADWEEP ADMN

¶25

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-08-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶28

ANNEXURE A1: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.6.2012 IN W.P(C). 14003/12 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶29

ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 8.1.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.

¶30

ANNEXURE A3: TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 8.1.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER.

¶31

ANNEXURE A4: TRUE COPY OF THE REMINDER DATED 8.1.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER.

¶32

/TRUE COPY/

¶33

PS TO JUDGE.

¶34

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶35

Cont. Case (C).No.398 of 2013

¶36

¶37

Dated this the 16^th day of August, 2013

¶38

JUDGMENT

¶39

The writ petition filed by the petitioners was disposed of by judgment dated 25.6.2012, directing that orders will be passed on the reference applications submitted by them. It is complaining that this order has not been complied with, this petition is filed. The respondent has filed an affidavit which shows that reference applications were received from all, except petitioners 1 and 3, that orders have been passed on the applications received and that the matter stands referred to the District Court, Kavarati. Thus, there is absolutely no merit in the allegation of non-compliance of the direction in the judgment. The contempt case is, therefore, closed.

¶40

Sd/ANTONY DOMINIC

¶41

Judge

¶42

kkb.

Koyammakoya Chakkarakada v. Cheriyakoya M.K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Koyammakoya Chakkarakada v. Cheriyakoya M.K

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

Sunu, D/O.Thilkamma Vs Prasanth

Shyjith @ Shyju.P Vs Sudha.K.K

Ravi Raghava Vs M/S. Lolitha A.V. @ Lolitha Ravi

Mini Kumari Vs K.K.R.Prasad

E.Balakrishnan Vs a Shajahan

Satheesan.P.M. Vs Joseph Abraham