Dismissed

Sidhik K.M v. Lathesh Kumar V.V

Kerala HC8 Jul 2019Con.Case(C)/219/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt proceeding filed alleging non-compliance with a previous judgment dated 29.8.2018, the Hon'ble Court observed that the respondent had obtained orders against the petitioner. Consequently, the Court stated there was no reason to pursue contempt proceedings further and closed the case.

What did the court decide?

Contempt proceedings were closed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order subsequently obtained by the respondent.

Sidhik K.M Vs Lathesh Kumar V.V — 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

MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

Con.Case(C).No.219 of 2019 IN WP(C). 21310/2018

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 21310/2018 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

SIDHIK K.M AGED 59 YEARS S/O. MUHAMMED HAJI, CAR MINE, IV/37F, ROTARY ROAD, MARKET P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA, RESIDING AT KAKKADAMKULAM HOUSE, MARKET P.O, AZAD ROAD, MUVATTUPUZHA.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.K.JAJU BABU (SR.) SMT.ELIZABETH ANTONY SMT.M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI

¶10

RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:

¶11

LATHESH KUMAR V.V

¶12

AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY, MUVATTUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY, MUVATTUPUZHA-686 661

¶13

BY ADV. SRI.L.RAM MOHAN, SC, MUVATTUPUZHA MUNICIPALITY

¶14

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Con.Case(C).No.219 of 2019

JUDGMENT

J U D G M E N T

This contempt case is filed by the petitioner complaining that the directions contained in the judgement dated 29.8.2018 is not complied with.

¶20

An affidavit is filed by the respondent

¶21

Municipality and has produced Ext.R1(d) order dated 17.5.2019, from where I am satisfied that, orders are already passed, however, against the petitioner. Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the

¶22

contempt of court proceedings any further.

¶23

The contempt case is closed accordingly leaving

¶24

open the liberty of the petitioner to challenge the order, if advised.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY

Smv 8.7.2019

JUDGE

Con.Case(C).No.219 of 2019

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶33

ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.08.2018 IN W.P.(C) NO. 21310/2018 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 01.12.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY VIDE NO. PH218483/18 DATED 28.12.2018 OBTAINED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT. ANNEXURE R1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 6.2.19 ANNEXURE R1(a) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED TO PETITIONER DATED 6.2.2019 ANNEXURE R1(b) TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 6.2.19

Sidhik K.M v. Lathesh Kumar V.V

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sidhik K.M v. Lathesh Kumar V.V

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

Vipin.a.K Vs Manjeri Municipality

Nadeera.M, Vs the Secretary to Government

Radhamony, Vs Kerala State Financial Enterprises Ltd.

Vibin Varghese Vs the District Collector

Vysakhan Radhakrishnan, Vs Tahsildar

Sherin Kaniyamparambil Varghese, Vs the District Collector