A review petition challenging a common order dismissing a rehearing application in a contempt of court case was disposed of by the High Court of Kerala. The Court held the petition was not maintainable and constituted an abuse of process.
The review petition was dismissed as it was held to be not maintainable and an abuse of process.
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 RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 24TH ASWINA, 1941
RP.No.553 OF 2019 IN Con.Case(C). 716/2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Con.Case(C) 716/2019 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
HARPREET KAUR ANAND, AGED 45 YEARS W/O. MR. MATHEW JOSEPH, TEMPORARILY RESIDING AT (SHELTER HOME) C/O. SHANTI BHAVANAM (PROVIDED BY GOVERNMENT) KAMMATTIPADAM, NEAR KSRTC BUS STAND, ERNAKULAM, KERALA 682 035. HARPREETS MOBILE NUMBER 9717307465.
BY HARPREET KAUR ANAND(PARTY IN PERSON)
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
MATHEW JOSEPH, AGED 47 YEARS S/O. RTD. SQLDR P.I JOSEPH, PERMANENTLY RESIDING AT DOOR NO. 3B, IVORY HEIGHTS, PARAMBITHARA CROSS ROAD, PANAMPALLY NAGAR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, KERALA 682 036 MATHEW'S MOBILE NUMBER-9846313232
BY ADV. SRI.PRAVEEN K. JOY
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. RAMESH CHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.10.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P.553/2019 IN C.O(C) 716/2019
2
ORDER
By order dated 14.02.2019, this Court had passed a common order disposing Crl.R.P.No.1536 of 2018 and Crl.R.P.No.161 of 2019 preferred by the contesting parties challenging the judgment in Crl.A.No.234 of 2018 on the files of the Additional Sessions Court-VIII, Ernakulam. By the said order, Crl.R.P.No.1536 of 2018 was allowed and Crl.R.P.No.161 of 2019 was dismissed.
R.P.553/2019 IN C.O(C) 716/2019
3
petition as framed is not maintainable and is clearly an abuse of process. This Court had clearly held that the respondent had complied with the directions and the contentions to the contrary raised by the petitioner cannot be accepted.
This review petition will stand dismissed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE
PS
R.P.553/2019 IN C.O(C) 716/2019
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A A COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10TH JUNE 2019 IN REHEARING PETITION FOR THE IMPUGNED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THIS CONC CASE 716/19 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT
ANNEXURE B MEMO AND STATEMENT FILED BY RESPONDENT BASED ON WHICH THE ABOVE MENTIONED ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ANNEXURE C COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER AT THE TRIAL COURT
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the review petitioner's petition is maintainable as it amounted to an abuse of process.
Whether the respondent had complied with the directions held by this Court in the contempt case.
Harpreet Kaur Anand
Mathew Joseph
Raja Vijayaraghavan V
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
