A contempt case was finally heard to determine compliance with prior directives. The court found the directives complied with and closed the case without further proceedings.
The contempt case was closed as the petitioner submitted that the directives were complied with.
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
WEDNESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF JULY 2019 / 12TH ASHADHA, 1941
Con.Case(C).No.448 of 2019 IN WP(C). 37097/2018
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 37097/2018 of HIGHCOURT
PETITIONER/S:
SURESH AGED 40 YEARS
S/O.DEVADAS, SREENILAYAM HOUSE, CHENNITHALA.P.O. KURATTISSERY VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690105.
BY ADV. SRI.R.SANTHOSH BABU
RESPONDENT/S:
ATHUL SWAMYANATH (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHENGANNUR PIN-689121.
SMT.VINITHA.B, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No.448 of 2019
2
JUDGMENT
This contempt case is filed by the petitioner complaining that the directives contained in the judgment dated 15.11.2018 is not complied with.
Today when the matter is taken up, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the directives in the judgment are complied with. Therefore, I do not find any reason to pursue the contempt case any further. The contempt case is closed accordingly.
Sd/
SHAJI P.CHALY
JUDGE
Jm/
Con.Case(C).No.448 of 2019
3
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A CERTIFIED COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P. (C)NO.37097/18 DATED 15-11-2018 ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 29/11/2018 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT.
Suresh
Athul Swamyathan
Shaji P.Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
