Dismissed

N.D.Joseph v. Arakkal v.a.Muhammed Basheer

Kerala HC6 Jul 2015Con.Case(C)/234/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt application alleging non-compliance of directions in a previous judgment, the Court held that the case should not remain pending post-bifurcation. The petitioner is free to approach the Court after the final disposal of the pending Supreme Court Special Leave Petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed; Petitioner directed to approach Court after final disposal of SLP pending before Supreme Court.

N.D.Joseph Vs Arakkal v.a.Muhammed Basheer — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

¶4

MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2015/15TH ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 234 of 2010 (S)

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WA 2330/2008 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 9/12/2009

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

N.D.JOSEPH,S/O. AGED 54 , NADUKUDIYIL HOUSE, KARUMPLAMATTOM KARIMANNUR PO, THODUPUZHA, IDUKKI.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL SMT.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

ARAKKAL V.A.MUHAMMED BASHEER,

¶12

AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER PRESIDENT MUVATTUPUZHA-KOTHAMANGALAM PRIMARY CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.NO. 4389, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶13

RBY SRI.K.JAJU BABU.

¶14

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

COC NO.234/2010

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶18

ANNEXURE A1: TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WA NO.2330/2008 DATED 9.12.2009.

//True Copy//

PS to Judge

ASHOK BHUSHAN, CJ &

¶23

A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

¶24

================

¶25

Cont.Case (C) No.234 of 2010 ====================

¶26

Dated this, the 6^th day of July, 2015

¶27

J U D G M E N T

¶28

Shaffique.J

¶29

This contempt case has been filed alleging non compliance of the directions issued by this Court as per judgment dated 9/12/2009. In para 5 of the judgment, this Court held as under;

¶30

“Now, it is common case that there is a post of Assistant Secretary, available in the appellant Society. It is stated to be more or less equivalent to the post of Administrative Officer. So, the 4^th respondent shall be re-instated in the post of Assistant Secretary. If any loan amount is remaining unpaid by the 4^th respondent, needless to say, the Society will be free to take appropriate action to recover the same from the said respondent.”

¶31

It is now brought to the notice of this Court that the appellant had already filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, which is still pending. That apart, on bifurcation of the respondent Bank, the petitioner had joined in the bifurcated

¶32

COC No.234/2010

¶33

-:2:-

¶34

branch as Secretary. In the said circumstance, we do not think that the contempt case should be kept pending. It is always open for the petitioner to approach this Court after final disposal of the Special Leave Petition, if there is any non compliance of the directions issued by this Court.

¶35

Contempt case is closed.

¶36

Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE

¶37

Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

¶38

¶39

//True Copy//

¶40

PS to Judge

N.D.Joseph v. Arakkal v.a.Muhammed Basheer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.D.Joseph v. Arakkal v.a.Muhammed Basheer

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

S.Srrejayan Vs K.J.Mathew, Chief Secretary,Secretariat

S.v.Subimol Vs P.P.Anilkumar

T.G.Rao Vs P.K.Santhoshakumar

P.J Mathew Vs Smt.Kamala Vardhana Rao,Ias

Rajesh Bharadwaj Vs State of Kerala

Mahatma Gandhi University & 2 Others Vs Shalaz S. & Another