Petitioner filed contempt case challenging non-compliance of a prior order; counsel for respondent opposed due to lack of application; petitioner filed proper application; Court closed the contempt case.
The contempt of court case is closed.
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. 68 of 2016 (S) IN WP(C).7658/2015
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7658/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 11-03-2015
PETITIONER(S):
SREEKANTH S.B, AGED 38 YEARS S/O.LATE BALAKRISHNA PILLA, SREEMANGALAM SOORANADU NORTH P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN: 690 561.
BY ADVS.SRI.N.SUKUMARAN (SR.) SRI.S.SHYAM SRI.N.K.KARNIS SRI.KIRAN PETER KURIAKOSE SRI.KURUVILLA JOHN SRI.B.SATHEEZ CHANDRAN
RESPONDENT(S):
M.R.UNNI, REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY PRIYADARSINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM, PIN: 686 560.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-03-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 68 of 2016 (S) IN WP(C).7658/2015
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS EXHIBITS:
| ANNEXURE A1 | COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.3.15 IN W.P.(C) NO.7658/15. |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2 | COPY OF THE LETTER FORWARDING ANNEXURE A1 DATED 20.3.15 |
| ANNEXURE A2(A) | COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMNT RECEIPT SIGNED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 21.3.15 |
| ANNEXURE A3 | COPY OF THE REMINDER LETTER ISSUED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.9.15 |
| ANNEXURE A3(A) | COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT SIGNED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 28.9.15 |
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
// TRUE COPY //
P.A TO JUDGE
SB
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.
=====================
Contempt of Court Case No.68 of 2016- S
================================ Dated this the 15th day of March, 2016
J U D G M E N T
The learned Standing Counsel opposes the contempt
of court case on the ground that no proper application has been filed, as directed by this Court in Annexure-A1 judgment. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that proper application has now been filed.
In such circumstance, nothing survives in the
contempt of court case and the same would stand closed.
Sd/-
K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE
SB/15/03/2016
// true copy //
P.A to Judge
Sreekanth S.B
M.R. Unni
K. Vinod Chandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
