Dismissed

Naduvil Vellad Devaswom v. Sri. Mir Muhammed Ali, I.A.S

Kerala HC2 Mar 2018Con.Case(C)/1742/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed a contempt petition challenging respondents' failure to initiate recovery proceedings for land. The court held that since the land was neither in the name nor possession of the petitioner, there was no wilful disobedience, and the remedy lies in the civil court. The petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The contempt petition is dismissed.

Naduvil Vellad Devaswom Vs Sri. Mir Muhammed Ali, I.A.S — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ANTONY DOMINIC &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU

¶5

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 11TH PHALGUNA, 1939

¶6

Con.Case(C).No. 1742 of 2017 IN WA. 906/2016 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 906/2016 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 18-08-2016

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/1ST RESPONDENT/WRIT PETITIONER

¶8

NADUVIL VELLAD DEVASWOM THALIPARAMBA TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER.

¶9

BY ADV.SRI.MOHAN C.MENON

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2:

¶11

SRI. MIR MUHAMMED ALI, I.A.S

¶12

AGED 28 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR - 670 001.

¶13

K.ABDUL RASHEED

¶14

AGED 45 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,

¶15

VILLAGE OFFICER, VELLAD, KANNUR-670 001.

¶16

R1 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU

¶17

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ANTONY DOMINIC, C.J. &

¶19

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

¶20

Cont. Case (C) No.1742 of 2017

¶21

Dated this the 2^nd day of March, 2018

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Antony Dominic, C.J.

¶24

This contempt petition is filed alleging disobedience of the directions contained in the judgment in W.A. No.906 of 2016. The said appeal was filed against the judgment in W.P.(C) No.39071 of 2015. The writ petition in question was filed by the petitioner herein without impleading any private respondents, seeking initiation of proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act for recovery of a large extent of property allegedly belonging to the Devaswom and in the occupation of private individuals. The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 22.12.15 directing that proceedings be initiated in accordance with law. That judgment was confirmed by the Division Bench of this Court in the writ appeal filed by

¶25

Cont. Case (C) No.1742 of 2017 -2-

¶26

certain third parties whose rights were affected by the judgment of the learned single Judge. It is this judgment of the Division Bench which is stated to be disobeyed.

¶27

The affidavit filed by the first respondent in the writ petition, the District Collector of Kannur, shows that the claim of the Devaswom is for recovery of 22603.23 Acres of land, which are spread out in Vellad village, new Naduvil and Udayagiri Villages under the Taliparambu Taluk. It is also stated that out of the above, except 1.64 Acres in R.S. No.23/1 of Vellad Village in the possession of the Devaswom where the temple is housed, rest of the properties are neither found in the name of the Devaswom nor in the possession of Devaswom. Though the Devaswom is having this averment, fact remains that, in such a situation as is revealed from the counter affidavit filed, the respondents cannot be faulted on the allegation that they have disobeyed the directions of this Court. According to us, petitioner has not made out a case of wilful disobedience and the remedy if

¶28

-3-

¶29

Cont. Case (C) No.1742 of 2017

¶30

at all to recover possession of the property of the petitioner,

¶31

is for them to move the appropriate civil court.

¶32

The contempt petition is dismissed.

¶33

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC CHIEF JUSTICE

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE

¶36

kns/-

¶37

//TRUE COPY//

¶38

P.S. TO JUDGE

Naduvil Vellad Devaswom v. Sri. Mir Muhammed Ali, I.A.S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Naduvil Vellad Devaswom v. Sri. Mir Muhammed Ali, I.A.S

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kanakamma Vs Shynamole

P.L.Johnson Vs the Government of Kerala

The University of Calicut Vs Allen N.J

E.K. Mathew Vs Maheswari P.

Aminu Abdulkhader Vs Mr.Patil Ajit Bhagwatrao IAS

Sundhari Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer