N.v.Mathew Roy Wilfred v. Antony Chacko
Case brief
What is this about?
The Kerala High Court certifies that the directions contained in a previous judgment (Annexure A) have been complied with and closes the contempt of court proceeding.
What did the court decide?
Proceeding closed as directions in the earlier judgment were complied with.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/7TH PHALGUNA, 1937
Con.Case(C).No. 1114 of 2015 (S) IN W.P.(C). NO. 12446/2015
JUDGMENT DATED 26.05.2015 IN W.P.(C.) NO. 12446/2015
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:-
N.V.MATHEW ROY WILFRED, AGED 47 YEARS WORKING AS CHARGEMAN, REGIONAL WORKSHOP, K.S.R.T.C. ALUVA, RESIDING AT KEREEKAD P.O., KANIYAVALLY THIRUVANKULAM, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.SABU S.KALLARAMOOLA
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:-:
ANTONY CHACKO S/O. NOT KNOWN, (AGE AND RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) NOW WORKING AS THE CHAIRMAN & MANAGING DIRECTOR KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
N.V.MATHEW ROY WILFRED
- respondent
KSRTC
Coram
V. CHITAMBARESH
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court