Kerala High Court
Fr.Vincent Pulickal vs Sri.U V Jose on 27 September, 2016
Author: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
Bench: V Raja Vijayaraghavan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
TUESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF AUGUST 2017/7TH BHADRA, 1939
Con.Case(C).No. 814 of 2017 (S) IN WA.1159/2015
-------------------------------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1159/2015 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA
DATED 27-09-2016
PETITIONER/2ND PETITIONER IN W.P(C):
------------------------------------
FR.VINCENT PULICKAL,
PROCURATOR AND CARETAKER,
ST.VINCENT'S INDUSTRIAL'S(DEFUNCT,
BISHOP'S HOUSE,MALAPARAMBA,
CALICUT-673009.
BY ADV. SRI.R.RAMADAS
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 3 AND 5 IN W.P.(C):
------------------------------------------
1.SRI.U V JOSE,
(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
KOZHIKODE-673001.
2.SRI.K.T.SUBRAMANIAN,
(AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)
THE TAHSILDAR,(REVENUE RECOVERY),
OFFICE OF THE TAHSILDAR,
KOZHIKODE,PIN-673001.
R1,R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.A.ASIF
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 29-08-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
COC NO.814/2017
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS ANNEXURES:
ANNEXURE-1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 13.6.2014 IN
W.P.(C) NO.4296/2014
ANNEXURE-2 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.9.2016 IN
W.A. NO.1159/2015
ANNEXURE-3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
5.11.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
THE RESPONDENTS
/TRUE COPY/
VPS PS TO JUDGE
NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, C.J. &
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., J.
--------------------------------------------------
Contempt Case (C) No.814 OF 2017
---------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of August, 2017
JUDGMENT
------------------
Navaniti Prasad Singh, C.J.
Learned Government Pleader for the State places on record the Government order dated 25.8.2007 vide No.301/2017/Rev. whereby the Government has ordered re-conveyance of property to the petitioner. That being so, we are of the view that the judgment and order of this Court has been complied with. We see no reason for continuing with the proceedings. This contempt proceedings is accordingly disposed of. Needless to mention, the Government order shall be complied with without any further delay.
Sd/-
NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE vps 29/8