Dismissed

N.K.Mohammed v. Rosamma Jacob

Kerala HC7 Feb 2019Con.Case(C)/118/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt of court case, the petitioner challenged compliance with directives from a prior judgment. The respondent submitted affidavit evidence showing a stop memo had been withdrawn before the writ petition was filed. The court held no case was made out for contempt.

What did the court decide?

Contempt of Court case closed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the underlying order passed.

N.K.Mohammed Vs Rosamma Jacob — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2019 / 18TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

Con.Case(C).No. 118 of 2019 IN WP(C). 40123/2018

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 40123/2018 DATED 10.12.2018 of HIGHCOURT OF KERALA

¶7

PETITIONER/S:

¶8

N.K.MOHAMMED, AGED 72 YEARS, S/O. KUNHAMU, MANAGING DIRECTOR, SPICE BOWL HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED, WNNY, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 572.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.P.P.BIJU

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

ROSAMMA JACOB, (AGE AND NAME OF FATHER IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIOENR) SECRETARY, KIZHAKKOTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT,KIZHAKKOTH P.O, KODUVALLY VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT 673 572.

¶12

BY ADVS. SRI.VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN SMT.JASILA BEEVI V.K. SMT.K.P.SUSMITHA SRI.T.M.KHALID

¶13

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07.02.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

Con.Case(C).No. 118 of 2019 IN WP(C). 40123/2018 2

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

This Contempt of Court Case is filed by the petitioner complaining that the directives contained in the Judgment dated 10.12.2018, is not complied with by the 3^rd respondent.

¶17

A detailed counter affidavit is filed by the 3^rd respondent, refuting the allegations raised by the petitioner in the contempt case and has produced Ext.R1(a) dated 03.12.2018, stating that the stop memo issued was withdrawn even before filing of the writ petition.

¶18

In that view of the matter, I do not think petitioner has made out any case, so as to proceed in contempt against the respondent.

¶19

Therefore, leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the order passed, this Contempt of Court case is closed.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

uu 07.02.2019

Con.Case(C).No. 118 of 2019 IN WP(C). 40123/2018 3

¶25

APPENDIX

¶26

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶27

ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10-12-2018 IN WP(C) NO. 40123/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

¶28

ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE CONTEMPT NOTICE DATED 11-1-2019 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT

¶29

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:NIL

¶30

//TRUE COPY//

¶31

P.A. TO JUDGE

N.K.Mohammed v. Rosamma Jacob

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N.K.Mohammed v. Rosamma Jacob

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Latha Vs the District Collector

Immanual Thomas, Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee

Prabhu, Vs the Local Level Monitoring Committee for the Pirayiri Panchayat

Abdul Nazar P.T., Vs State of Kerala

Antony Noby Vs a. S. Anuja

Divakaran, Vs the Land Revenue Commissioner