Petition questioned non-compliance of a judgment dated 08.07.2016 regarding payment. Court found significant amounts paid; balance claim is for civil recovery, not contempt. Case closed with liberty to pursue recovery.
contempt case closed, liberty to petitioner to pursue civil claim for balance amount
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
TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/18TH MAGHA, 1938
Con.Case(C).No. 1591 of 2016 (S)
JUDGMENT DATED 08-07-2016 IN WP(C) 21871/2016
PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
G.SOMAN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O GOPALAN, ROHINI, PALLICKAL, KOTTARAKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.DR.K.P.SATHEESAN (SR.) SRI.P.MOHANDAS (ERNAKULAM) SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN SRI.K.SUDHINKUMAR SRI.ELIAS KURIAN SMT.SHYNI GEORGE
RESPONDENT(S)/3RD RESPONDENT.:
MR. H.VENKITESH, AGED 50 YEARS, (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE BEVERAGES (M & M) CORPORATION LTD, SASTHAMANGALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 010.
BY ADV. SRI.NAVEEN.T., SC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
msv/
Con.Case(C).No. 1591 of 2016 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES
A I- CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD.8.7.2016 IN WPC.NO.21871/2016.
A IITRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FORM ALONG WITH THE DETAILS OF LIQUOR TRANSFERRED FROM HOTEL AKASH (FL-3 LICENSE NO.24) DTD.21.7.2016.
A IIITRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FORM ALONG WITH THE DETAILS OF LIQUOR TRANSFERRED FROM HOTEL ROHINI DTD.21.7.2016.
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURE
NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
Msv/
SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
Contempt Case (C)No. 1591 of 2016 -----------------------------------------Dated this the 7th day of February, 2017
J U D G M E N T
This contempt case is filed by the petitioner complaining that the directions contained under the judgment dated 08.07.2016 is not complied with. However, according to the learned counsel for the respondent as per their accounts the entire amount is paid to the petitioner and orders are passed accordingly. I also find from the documents produced by the respondent that several amounts are paid to the petitioner. The grievance put forth by the petitioner is that, even though major portion of the amount is paid, still a balance is remaining which is disputed by the respondent. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is a contempt committed by the respondent in order to invoke action under the same. If the petitioner is aggrieved with non release of any portion of the amount, it is for the petitioner to pursue any action for recovery of the amount. Therefore, the contempt case
Contempt Case (C)No. 1591 of 2016 2
is closed leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to pursue
any claim against the respondent.
Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
rmm/8/2/2017
1 issue framed by the court
whether the respondent is in contempt for alleged non-compliance with a prior judgment regarding payment of amount
G.SOMAN
MR. H.VENKITESH
SHAJI P. CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
