B. Premachandra Kumar v. Baburaj
Case brief
What is this about?
In a prayer contem pt case, the court held that since the respondent Panchayat complied with the earlier direction by including the petitioner in the beneficiary list, no contempt proceedings were necessary. The matter was closed.
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 V.G.ARUN
MONDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 30TH KARTHIKA, 1944
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1555 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 5123/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER:
B. PREMACHANDRA KUMAR AGED 52 YEARS S/O. BHASKARA PILLAI, PRATHAP MANDIRAM, VELLIMON P. O., KUNDARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691511.
BY ADV A.SANIL KUMAR
RESPONDENT:
BABURAJ
(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) SECRETARY, PERINAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOLLAM ELEMBALLOOR ROAD, KUZHIYAM, CHEMMAKKAD P. O., KOLLAM - 691 603.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
B. Premachandra Kumar
- respondent
Baburaj
Coram
V. G. Arun
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court