Abdul Jabbar v. Vishwas Mehta
Case brief
What is this about?
In a contempt case filed for non-compliance with a direction to consider an approval within six months, the court found the defendant had never submitted the certified judgment copy, rendering the alleged violation impossible. Consequently, the contempt case was closed.
What did the court decide?
The contempt case stands closed.
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 K.VINOD CHANDRAN
TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2016/25TH PHALGUNA, 1937
Con.Case(C).No. 214 of 2016 (S) IN WP(C).3710/2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 3710/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 21-07-2015
PETITIONER:
ABDUL JABBAR AGED 58 YEARS S/O.ALI, APPAZHAM HOUSE, PANAMPILLY ROAD ELOOR EAST, UDYOGAMANDAL.
BY ADVS.SRI.K.R.MOHANAN SRI.K.M.SANAL
RESPONDENTS:
1. VISHWAS MEHTA, AGED 55 YEARS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY REVENUE DEPT., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM KERALA.(FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER).
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt case survives given the lack of a certified copy of the judgment which triggered the potential violation.
How to dispose of a contempt case when the condition precedent for the alleged violation is missing.
Whether the Deputy Collector's claim that the judgment was received later defeats the petitioner's contention.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Abdul Jabbar
- respondent
Vishwas Mehta
- respondent
M.G. Rajamanickam
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court