P.a.George v. B. Andrew Prabhu
Case brief
What is this about?
Contempt case regarding compliance of earlier pension judgment closed as all claims settled except for one petitioner who intended to migrate. Court found no further matters to decide.
What did the court decide?
Contempt case closed; no further orders.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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 A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
FRIDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2020 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1942
Con.Case(C).No.1048 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 18287/2016
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.10.2018 IN WP(C) 18287/2016(I) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS 2, 4, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19,
21, 22, 23, 25, 26:
1 P.A.GEORGE AGED 62 YEARS S/O. P.V.ALEXANDER, PUTHENVETTIL, VYTTILA P. O., ERNAKULAM, PF A/C NO.KR/KCH/0013212/000/0000164 P.P.O.NO.KR/KCH/00089287
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioners 1-26 (mostly PF schemes)
- respondent
B. Andrew Prabu
Coram
A.M. Shaffique
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court