In a contempt of court case filed for non-compliance with a directive dated 11.04.2019, the court was satisfied upon counsel submission that payments were made on 15.11.2019 and closed the matter accordingly.
Discontinued and closed the contempt case due to fulfillment of the directive.
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 02ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
Con.Case(C).No.1189 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 7638/2019
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7638/2019(D) DATED 11.04.2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/S:
M/s. BUILD TECH ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTOR, EF1, BRITANIA HOUSE, ALTO PORVORIM, GOA-403521, REPRESNTED BY ITS PROPRIETOR, T.V. BALAKRISHNAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O. PADINCHARE PUTHIYA VEETIL KANNAN PANICKER.
BY ADVS. SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.ARUN THOMAS SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN SRI.VIJAY V. PAUL SMT.VEENA RAVEENDRAN SRI.ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL SMT.DIVYA SARA GEORGE SMT.JAISY ELZA JOE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 DR.A.KOWSIGAN, IAS, MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, JALABHAVAN, VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAURAM-695033.
2 MR. P. GOPALAN, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H. CIRCLE, KANNUR-670012.
3 MR. V.K. RATHANAKUMAR, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PROJECT DIVISION, KANNUR-670012.
4 MR.K.R. AJI, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, MUNICIPAL SECRETARY, PAYYANNUR MUNICIPALITY, PAYYANNUR P.O, KANNUR-670307.
Con.Case(C).No.1189 OF 2019 2
R1 TO R3 BY SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
R4 BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No.1189 OF 2019 3
JUDGMENT
This Contempt of court case is filed complaining
that the directives contained in the judgment dated 11.04.2019 is not complied with by the respondent.
learned counsel appearing for the respondent
submitted that, already the payments are made to the petitioner on 15.11.2019.
Therefore, in that view of the matter, I do not
find any reason to pursue the Contempt of Court case any further, and closed accordingly, recording the above submission.
Sd/-
SHAJI P.CHALY
JUDGE
uu
02.12.2019
Con.Case(C).No.1189 OF 2019 4
APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 1189/2019
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 11.04.2018 IN WPC NO.7638 OF 2019.
ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.05.2019 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Con.Case(C).No.1189 OF 2019 5
Con.Case(C).No.1189 OF 2019 6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt of court case should be pursued after the respondent submitted that payments were made.
M/s. BUILD TECH ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTOR
DR.A.KOWSIGAN
MR. P. GOPALAN
MR. V.K. RATHANAKUMAR
MR.K.R. AJI
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
