Judges S. Manikumar and Shaji P. Chaly dismissed a contempt petition. The petitioner failed to substantiate averments of assault and illegal entry with documentary evidence, specifically the date and copy of the police complaint, rendering the petition unentertained.
Petitioner's allegations not supported by documents; tendency not to entertain the petition.
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 THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 30TH MAGHA, 1941
Con.Case(C).No.400 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 13345/2019
ARISING FROM THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 13345/2019(P) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 10.6.2019
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
J.MAYA, AGED 50 YEARS, D/O JAPAMANI PUTHENPURAYIL, DHANUVACHAPURAM, NADOORKOLLA, KOLLAYIL, TRIVANDRUM - 695 502.
BY ADVS. SMT.K.P.SANTHI SMT.TARA PREM
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 3-5:
1 S.ANILKUMAR, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, NEYYATTINKARA P.O., TRIVANDRUM - 695 121.
2 REYAS, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSALA POLICE STATION, PARASSALAP.O.,TRIVANDRUM - 695 001.
3 SREELAL, AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO PETITIONER, SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PARASSLA POLICE STATION, PARASSALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Cont. Case (c).400/2020
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2020
S. Manikumar, CJ
Alleging wilful disobedience of judgment in W.P(C). No.13345 of 2019, instant Contempt Case is filed. Perusal of paragraph 2 of the judgment shows that petitioner has contended that the house belongs to her exclusively. She is unable to even enter the house and even when residing there, respondents 6 and 7 are constantly harassing.
“Issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order compelling the respondents 2 to 5 to give adequate police protection to the petitioner's life”
judgment in W.P(C). No.13345 of 2019 ordered thus:
“if any complaint of assault or physical harassment is raised by the petitioner, the police shall look into the same. However, for the purpose of eviction of party respondents, the petitioner would have to necessarily invoke civil remedies available.
With the above observation, the writ petition would stand disposed of”
3
Cont. Case (c).400/2020
In such circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this Contempt Petition. Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is dismissed.
All pending applications, if any, stand closed.
Sd/S. Manikumar, Chief Justice
Sd/Shaji P. Chaly,
sou.
Cont. Case (c).400/2020
4
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 10/6/2019 IN W.P.(C) NO.13345 OF 2019 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to entertain a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of a previous judgment where the petitioner failed to submit supporting documentary evidence for her averments.
J.Maya
Anil Kumar
Reyas
Sreelal
State of Kerala
Unknown Respondents 6 and 7
S. Manikumar
Shaji P. Chaly
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
