This contempt petition was closed as the respondent achieved substantial compliance with the earlier order. The petitioner reserved the right to challenge the respondent's orders in appropriate proceedings.
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 A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/22ND SRAVANA, 1937
Con.Case(C).No. 1024 of 2015 (S)
WP(C) 14561/2015, DATED 16-07-2014
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN W.P.[C]:
JITTO S.MANGALATH, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.SUNNY, MANGALATH HOUSE, MONIPPILLY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN (SR.)
SMT.P.R.REENA
RESPONDENT(S)/1ST RESPONDENT IN W.P[C]:
SABU B,
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE SECRETARY, UZHAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, UZHAVOOR.P.O., PIN-686 634.
BY ADVS. SRI.K.C.CHARLES
SRI.M.POLY MATHAI SRI.VIMAL K.CHARLES
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PJ
Con.Case(C).No. 1024 of 2015 (S)
PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE I: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE DATA BANK PREPARED BY UZHAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
ANNEXURE II: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3/2/14 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY UZHAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
ANNEXURE III: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC.14561/14 DATED 16/7/14
ANNEXURE IV: COPY OF THE LETTER 20/10/14 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURE
NIL.
/ TRUE COPY /
P.S. TO JUDGE
PJ
A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
Cont. Case (C) No.1024 of 2015 in W.P.(C) No.14561 of 2014
Dated this the 13th day of August, 2015.
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that
the order has been complied with, though it was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the orders were passed not in accordance with the decisions referred to in the judgment.
As there is substantial compliance, the contempt petition is closed, reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the orders now passed by the respondent in the appropriate proceedings.
Sd/-
A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE
Scl.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can subsequently challenge the orders due to alleged lack of substantial compliance.
Jitto S.Mangalath
Sabu B
A.V. Ramakrishna Pillai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
