Dismissed

Vitalis Maria Mathew v. v.M.Tessy

Kerala HC20 Jan 2021Con.Case(C)/1948/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience regarding water connection directions was closed. The court held that respondent's inability stemmed from petitioner's failure to remit road cutting charges, negating wilfulness.

What did the court decide?

Contempt of Court Case closed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to institute proceedings again if the direction is not complied with after charges are remitted.

Vitalis Maria Mathew Vs v.M.Tessy — Contempt of Court | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 30TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

Con.Case(C).No.1948 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 27684/2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 27684/2019(I) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

VITALIS MARIA MATHEW, AGED 74 YEARS S/O. JOSEPH, RESDIING AT KAVALAKKAL HOUSE, EDAKOCHI VILLAGE, EDAKOCHI P.O, KOCHIN 682 010

¶9

BY ADVS. SHRI.K.S.SREERAJ SRI.K.BIJU SRI.M.C.VARGHESE SHRI.SYAM K.P. SMT.RADHU S.

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 V.M.TESSY, AGED 50 YEARS (FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER WORKS, SUB DIVISION, KARUVELIPADY, KOCHI 5

¶12

2 SOJAN JACOB, AGED 50 YEARS (FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KEREALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER WORKS, SUB DIVISION, KARUVELIPADY, KOCHI 5

¶13

R1-2 BY SHRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY

¶14

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

..2..

¶16

Cont. Case (C) No.1948 of 2020

¶17

Contempt Case (C) No.1948 of 2020

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This proceedings is instituted alleging wilful disobedience of the direction issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No.27684 of 2019.

¶20

The writ petition was one instituted seeking directions to the officials of the Kerala Water Authority to provide a water connection to the petitioner.

¶21

It is seen that when the matter was taken up, the learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Water Authority submitted that water connection can be given to the petitioner from the water line passing slightly away from the building of the petitioner, provided the petitioner is prepared to bear the cost of drawing the line. The petitioner agreed to bear the cost of drawing line and the writ petition was accordingly disposed of directing the Water Authority to provide water connection to the petitioner within a period of two months. As noted, it is alleging wilful disobedience of the said direction that this Contempt of Court Case is filed.

¶22

..3..

¶23

Cont. Case (C) No.1948 of 2020

¶24

An affidavit has been filed by the concerned

¶25

official of the Kerala Water Authority. Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said affidavit read thus:

¶26

“5. On 15.01.2020, the 2^nd respondent has addressed the Asst. Executive Engineer, PWD Road Sub Division, Ernakulam to accord sanction for road cutting at a length of 5 meters at Kannangatt Temple Road Junction in Pambai Moola, Eda Kochi for providing water supply connection to the petitioner, the copy of which was forwarded to the petitioner, since necessary charges for restoration has to be remitted by the petitioner. Since no permission was made available, the Asst. Executive Engineer was reminded again on 9.12.2020 and a copy was served on the petitioner. For getting road cutting sanction, the Secretary, Corporation of Kochi was also addressed and the matter was reminded.

¶27

It is humbly submitted that physical water connection can be given by laying pipiline under the road for which road cutting permission is necessary and necessary charges for road restoration has to be remitted in the respective offices and it is the responsibility of the petitioner to avail the sanction. Not only that the copies of the letters and the reminders were sent to the petitioner but also to the counsel on 7.8.2020 who sent lawyer's notice which is marked as Annexure D in the contempt petition. No initiative was taken by the petitioner in getting the same.”

¶28

As evident from the extracted paragraphs of the affidavit, the inability on the part of the Water Authority in complying with

¶29

..4..

¶30

Cont. Case (C) No.1948 of 2020

¶31

the direction is on account of the failure on the part of the petitioner in remitting the charges payable to the Public Works Department and also to the Corporation of Kochi for restoration of the roads which are to be cut for drawing the water line to the building of the petitioner. The question as to who should bear the said charges has not been adjudicated in the judgment. As such, it cannot be said that the inaction to comply with the direction issued by this court is wilful.

¶32

The Contempt of Court Case, in the circumstances, is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to institute proceedings again under the Contempt of Courts Act, if the direction is not complied with even after the petitioner remitting the road cutting charges.

¶33

Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE

¶34

ds 20.01.2021

¶35

Cont. Case (C) No.1948 of 2020

¶36

..5..

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶39

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO. 27684/2019

¶40

ANNEXURE B TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT ANNEXURE C TRUE COPY OF THE ELTTER DATED 3-082020 ANNEXURE D TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 7-08-2020

Vitalis Maria Mathew v. v.M.Tessy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vitalis Maria Mathew v. v.M.Tessy

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

Don Paul Vs State of Kerala

K.H.Abdul Majeed Vs the Kalamassery Municipality

Eby A.M Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Joshy E.K. Vs Wadakanchery Municipality

Parambath Kandi Rabiumma Vs Thalassery Municipality

Col. Muhammad Yusuf Stalin Vs Dr. Divya Iyer