Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

K.Sreekumar vs K.R.Jyothilal on 28 October, 2016

Author: Shaji P. Chaly

Bench: Shaji P.Chaly

        

 
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                    PRESENT:

                       THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

             MONDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/17TH MAGHA, 1938

                                     Con.Case(C).No. 30 of 2017 (S)
                                    -----------------------------------------------
       AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO. 27867/2016, DATED 28-10-2016
                                                   -----------------

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER :
--------------------------------------------

                     K.SREEKUMAR,
                     PROPRIETOR, QUILON CONSULTING ENGINEERS,
                     GOKULAM, 2ND FLOOR, BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM.


                     BY ADV. SRI.S.SUDHEESHKAR

RESPONDENT(S)/1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS :
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

          1.         K.R.JYOTHILAL,
                     (AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),
                     SECRETARYTO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF
                     TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVERNMENT
                     SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

          2.         SHEELA THOMAS,
                     (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),
                     SECRETARYTO GOVERNMENT, INFORMATION AND
                     PUBLIC RELATIONS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF
                     KERALA, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
                     TRIVANDRUM- 695 001.

          3.         K.V.MARTHANDAN,
                     (AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER),
                     CHIEF ENGINEER (BOT PROJECTS), KERALA
                     TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION (KTDFC),
                     6TH FLOOR, TRANS TOWERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
                     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

                     R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. VINITHA B.HARIRAJ
                     R3 BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL K.R., S.C


           THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY
           HEARD ON 06-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
           THE FOLLOWING:
Msd.

Con.Case(C).No. 30 of 2017 (S)
-----------------------------------------------

                                                APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE 1:                   THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT
                              DATED 28.10.2016 IN W.P(C).NO. 27867 OF 2016.

ANNEXURE 2:                   TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 07.11.2016
                              FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT'S OFFICE.

ANNEXURE 3:                   TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD
                              DATED 09.11.2016 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT'S OFFICE.

ANNEXURE 4:                   TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD
                              DATED 09.11.2016 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT'S OFFICE.

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :


                                                NIL

                                                              //TRUE COPY//


                                                              P.A.TO JUDGE

Msd.



                          SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
                  -----------------------------------------------
                         COC No.30 of 2017
                                       in
                    W.P.(C) No.27867 of 2016
              -----------------------------------------------
           Dated this the 6th day of February, 2017



                               JUDGMENT

This contempt case is filed by the petitioner complaining that, the directives contained in the judgment dated 28.10.2016 is not complied with by the respondents.

2. Today as sought for by respondents 1 and 2 in the writ petition, the time granted by this court to comply with the directives is extended by a further period of two months from 25.12.2016. Therefore, in my considered opinion, the contempt of court case has become inconsequential and the relief sought for has become redundant. Therefore, there is no point in pursuing the matter any further and the same is closed, however, leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to file fresh one if situation demands.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE smv 06.02.2017