This is a contempt of court case filed against the respondent (Government Pleader) for non-compliance with writ directives dated 23.01.2017. The petitioner admitted compliance of the directives, and the contempt case was closed without further action.
Contempt case closed; no further action taken.
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
MONDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JANUARY 2018 / 18TH POUSHA, 1939 Con.Case(C).No. 2184 of 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 19879/2016 OF THE HONOURABLE COURT
PETITIONER:
ADV. PETER M. PAUL, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. M. K. PAILY, MUTHANATTEL HOUSE, BHAKTHANANDAPURAM P.O., PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682308.
BY ADV.SRI.ALIAS M.CHERIAN
RESPONDENT:
MR. P. SURESHKUMAR, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME OF THE RESPONDENT IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT AND COMPETENT AUTHORITY UNDER THE NOTARIES ACT, LAW DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-690 001.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. VINITHA B.
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08-01-2018,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
PBS
Con.Case(C).No. 2184 of 2017
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES
| ANNEXURE A1 | TRUE COPY 2016. |
OF JUDGMENT DATED 23/01/2017 IN W.P.C NO. 19879 OF |
|---|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2 | TRUE COPY | OF APPLICATION DATED 17/03/2017 |
| ANNEXURE A3 | TRUE COPY | OF APPLICATION DATED 20/07/2017. |
| ANNEXURE A4 | TRUE COPY | OF REPLY NO. 18426/H2/2017/LAW DATED 30/08/2017. |
| ANNEXURE A5 | TRUE COPY 2017. |
OF JUDGMENT DATED 18/07/2017 IN W.A. NO. 1453 OF |
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURE NIL
/TRUE COPY/
PA TO JUDGE
PBS
SHAJI P.CHALY, J.
========================
Cont.Case (C)No.2184 of 2017
======================== Dated this the 8th day of January 2018
JUDGMENT
This contempt case is filed complaining that the directives contained in the judgment dated 23.1.2017 is not complied with. Today when the matter is taken up, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the directives contained in the judgment are complied with.
Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt case any further. Accordingly, the contempt of court case is closed.
Sd/
SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE
jm/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the directives in the impugned writ judgment have been complied with.
ADV. PETER M. PAUL
MR. P. SURESHKUMAR
SHAJI P.CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
