, held that initiating contempt proceedings was inappropriate because an appeal against the impugned judgment had been filed and stayed; accordingly, dropped the contempt case without prejudice to future rights.
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 V.CHITAMBARESH
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/25TH JYAISHTA, 1937
Con.Case(C).No. 984 of 2014 (S) IN WP(C).22714/2013
JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 22714/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 17-01-2014
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC NO. 22714/2013(L):
THOMMAN JOSEPH, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.LATE MATHAI, KAPPIYANIKKAL HOUSE, AMANAKARA, RAMAPURAM VILLAGE, MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE.
BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE
RESPONDENTS/RESPOONDENTS IN WPC NO. 22714/2013(L):
BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN BY SRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KTWWFB
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
COC NO. 984/2014
APPENDIX
ANNEXURE 1 : CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 22714/2013(L) PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. ANNEXURE 2 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY KERALA TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND BOARD DATED 04.10.2013. ANNEXURE 3 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24.01.2014 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR. ANNEXURE 4 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 24.01.2014 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE VILLAGE OFFICER. ANNEXURE 5 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 12.07.2014 ANNEXURE 6 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTRATION SLIP PERTAINING TO THE LETTER.
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE.
V. CHITAMBARESH, J
C.O.C. NO. 984 OF 2014 IN WP(C) NO. 22714 OF 2013
Dated this the 15th day of June, 2015
JUDGMENT
Annexure 1 judgment is under appeal. The operation of the judgment is also stayed. It will be inappropriate to initiate contempt of court proceedings therefore.
The contempt of court case proceedings are dropped. This is without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move afresh after the disposal of the writ appeal.
V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE
ncd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to initiate contempt of court proceedings against the respondent when an appeal against the original order has been filed and stayed.
Thommen Joseph
Shri. A. Ajithkumar
Shri. T.D. David
Shri. Anil Oommen
K.M. Madusoodanan Nambudiri
V. Chitambaresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
