This is a contempt proceeding where the respondent alleged non-compliance of a previous order. The petitioner submitted that the prior order was complied with, leading the court to dismiss the contempt petition.
Contempt of case dismissed as the impugned order was found to be complied with.
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 K.RAMAKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2014/29TH PHALGUNA, 1935
Con.Case(C).No. 286 of 2014 (S)
**------------------------------------------**
AGAINST THE ORDER IN Crl.MC.NO. 1190/2014 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT DATED 13-02-2014
PETITIONER :
RENJITH S/O. RAVI, AGED 24 YEARS, NARIPPARA VEEDU VADATTUPARA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK ERNAKULAM
(DRIVER OF JCB BEARING REGISTRATION NUMBER KL-17-G 8796)
BY ADV. SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
RESPONDENT :
SIBI THOMAS AGED 40 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690 517.
BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. HYMA
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-03-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
Con.Case(C).No. 286 of 2014 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES :
ANNEXURE A1 : COPY OF THE SAID WRITTEN REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KOTHAMANGALAM POLICE STATION DATED 8.2.2014.
ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13.2.2014 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 1190 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.
-----------------------------------------------------------------Contempt of Case No.286 of 2014 --------------------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 20th day of March, 2014
O R D E R
The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that, the order has been complied with. So, under the circumstances, there is no necessity to proceed with this contempt of case. The above submissions are recorded and the contempt of case is dismissed.
Sd/K. Ramakrishnan, Judge
// True Copy //
P.A. to Judge
ss
Renjith S/O. Ravi
Sibi Thomas
K. Ramakrishnan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
