This contempt case was closed because the respondent subsequently released the undisputed amount to the petitioner via an order dated 25.08.2016, making further prosecution unnecessary.
Contempt case closed without any further prosecution.
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 SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2016/9TH BHADRA, 1938
Con.Case(C).No. 1326 of 2016 (S)
ORDER DATED 21-06-2016 IN I.A.9398/2016 IN WP(C).9999/2016.
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE W.P.(C):
O.J.PETER,
(SPECIAL GRADE CONDUCTOR, KSRTC, PERUMBAVOOR DEPOT), RESIDING AT OVUNGAMALI HOUSE, PULLUVAZHI P.O., KEEZHILLAM, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADV. SRI.K.P.RAJEEVAN
RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT IN THE W.P.(C):
SRI.ANTONY CHACKO (AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023.
BY SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR, SC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
mbr/
Con.Case(C).No. 1326 of 2016 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS’ ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE A1 : ORDER IN IA.9398 OF 2016 IN WP(C)NO.9999 OF 2016 DATED 21.6.2016.
RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
mbr/
SHAJI P. CHALY, J
C.O.C.NO.1326 OF 2016
in
W.P.(C)NO.9999 OF 2016
Dated this the 31st day of August, 2016
J U D G M E N T
This contempt case is filed by the petitioner stating that the impugned order passed by this court on 21.06.2016 in IA.No.9398/2016 is not complied with, even though, there was a direction to pay the admitted dues to the petitioner within one month. True, the order was not complied with within the time frame provided by this court. However, today when the matter is taken up, learned counsel for the respondent has produced an order dated 25.08.2016, whereby it is evident that the respondent passed an order releasing undisputed amount to the petitioner. This is recorded and taking into account that the order is passed even at a belated stage, there are no more reasons to pursue the contempt proceedings any further. Therefore, the contempt case is closed
C.O.C.NO.1326 OF 2016 in W.P.(C)NO.9999 OF 2016 2
leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the order if he is aggrieved.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE
R.AV/31/08/2016
O.J.Peter
Sri.Antony Chacko
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
