Disposed

K.G.Varghese v. P.B.Nooh

Kerala HC26 Feb 2020Con.Case(C)/2696/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a contempt of court case filed for alleged non-compliance of previous orders directing the delivery of survey documents to the petitioner. The High Court disposed of the contempt petition accepting the respondents' undertaking to furnish documents and complete the process promptly. The petitioner may reopen the case if undertakings are not complied with within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Discharged the contempt of court case. The petitioner was directed that he can reopen the case within six weeks in case of non-compliance of respondents' undertakings.

K.G.Varghese Vs P.B.Nooh — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1941 Con.Case(C).No.2696 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 2345/2019

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2345/2019(P) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

K.G.VARGHESE, AGED 78 YEARS, S/O.LATE GEEVARUGHESE, KIZHAVARAMANNIL HOUSE, THOTTABHAGOM MURI, KAVIYOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.P.HARIDAS SRI.CHERIAN GEE VARGHESE SRI.BIJU HARIHARAN SRI.R.B.BALACHANDRAN SRI.RENJI GEORGE CHERIAN SRI.P.C.SHIJIN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 P.B.NOOH, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN-695001.

¶11

2 SREEKUMAR K., AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS (LR)0, THIRUVALLA, PIN-689101.

¶12

3 JISHA, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONERS, PRESENTLY WORKING AS THE TALUK SURVEYOR, THIRUVALLA.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR.GOVT.PLEADER

¶15

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶17

==================

¶18

Contempt of Court Case (Civil).No. 2696 of 2019

¶19

==================

¶20

Dated this the 26^th day of February, 2020

¶21

J U D G M E N T

¶22

The above Contempt of Court Case (Civil). has been filed alleging non-compliance of the directions in Anx.1 judgment dated 25.1.20219 rendered by this Court in W.P.(C).No. 2345/2019 filed by the petitioner herein.

¶23

When the above contempt case had come up for consideration on 17.2.2020, this Court has passed an order on that day, which reads as follows:

¶24

“Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader would submit on the basis of instructions of the respondents that the survey and measurement of the subject property has been duly conducted by the respondents and thereafter, the petitioner was invited for a personal hearing to be held on 14.02.2020 before the 1^st respondent-District Collector, Pathanamthitta. But for reasons only known to the petitioner, he has not chosen to co-operate and participate in the said hearing and that therefore, though the 1^st respondent-District Collector could finalize the proceedings, the said officer has taken a liberal view and has posted the case again to 20.02.2020, so that the petitioner could participate in the personal hearing, if he is so interested and in case, the petitioner does not turn up again, the respondentOfficer will be constrained to ensure that the proceedings are finalized on the basis of the available materials.

¶25

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that necessary instructions will be given to the petitioner to ensure that he will participate for a personal hearing before the 1^st respondent on 20.02.2020 at 3 p.m. However, the petitioner has a complaint that copy of the survey report and the survey sketch has not been given to the petitioner till date.

¶26

3. Accordingly, it is ordered that the respondents, more particularly, the 2^nd respondent-Tahsildar and the 3^rd respondent-Taluk Surveyor will ensure that copies of the survey report and the survey

¶27

COC 2696/19

¶28

: 3 :-

¶29

sketch, along with the report if any of the Tahsildar should be immediately furnished to the petitioner, so that he can effectively participate in the hearing that is proposed to be held on 20.02.2020. In case, the copies of the survey report and the survey sketch has not been given to the petitioner so far, it may be ensured that those documents are given to the petitioner immediately and the 1^st respondent District Collector may also consider whether the hearing of the matter, which is now scheduled to be held on 20.02.2020 at 3 p.m. may be adjourned to a suitable day, to be held sometime, within a week thereafter, so that the petitioner gets sufficient opportunity to be well versed in the factual aspects emanating out of the survey report and the survey sketch, as the same has not been given to the petitioner till date, etc.

¶30

List on 02.03.2020.”

¶31

Today when the matter has been taken up for consideration, Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Govt. Pleader appearing for respondents would submit that, in order to ensure that yet another reasonable opportunity is offered to the petitioner, the hearing of the case has been adjourned to be conducted tomorrow (27/2/2020) before the 2^nd respondent Tahsildar and that after completing the procedural formalities, the 2^nd respondent Tahsildar will give necessary report in the matter to the 1^st respondent District Collector and thereafter, the respondent District Collector will ensure that after granting reasonable opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned, will pass orders in the matter without much delay and that the entire process is expected to be completed within next one month or so. The abovesaid submissions made on behalf of the respondents are recorded. In view of the abovesaid aspects, there is

¶32

COC 2696/19 - : 4 :-

¶33

no necessity to keep this contempt case any further. In case the abovesaid undertakings now given by the respondents are not complied with six weeks' time, then the petitioner will be at liberty to file appropriate application to reopen the contempt of court case.

¶34

With these observations and directions, the above Contempt of Court Case (Civil) stands disposed of.

¶35

Sd/sdk+ ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶36

COC 2696/19

¶37

: 5 :-

¶38

APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 2696/2019

¶39

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶40

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO.2345/2019 DATED 25.1.2019.

¶41

ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.B13-2640/19 DATED 1.6.2019 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT HEREIN TO THE PETITIONER.

¶42

ANNEXURE 3 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENT PRODUCED BY THE PETITIONER WITH THE RECEIPT OF ACCEPTANCE BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT ON 11.11.2019.

K.G.Varghese v. P.B.Nooh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.G.Varghese v. P.B.Nooh

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

Noufal Vs State of Kerala

Joseph, Vs State of Kerala

Shaji Vs Thalayazham Grama Panchayat

Ratheesh v., Vs the State of Kerala

The Chairman Vs the Secretary

M.R.Pushparajan, Vs State of Kerala