Kerala High Court
Green Method Engineering (P) Ltd vs Cyriac Davies on 13 March, 2015
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/15TH AGRAHAYANA, 1939
Con.Case(C).No. 2047 of 2016 (S)
------------------------------------------------
THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.27217/2013 DATED 13-03-2015.
.....
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WP(C).:
-------------------------------------------------------------
GREEN METHOD ENGINEERING (P) LTD.,
REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
DAVIS. M.V,ATC BUILDING, MOOLEPADOM NAGAR ROAD,
HMT JUNCTION, KALAMASSERY,KOCHI-683 104.
BY ADVS.SRI.VIJAYAN. K.U.,
SRI.C.V.MILTON.
RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT IN THE WP(C).:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
CYRIAC DAVIES,
CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, KITCO,
FEMITH'S, P.B.NO.4407, PUTHIYA ROAD,
N.H.BY PASS, VENNALA, KOCHI-682 028.
BY ADVS. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR,
SRI.P.GOPINATH,
SRI.P.BENNY THOMAS,
SRI.K.JOHN MATHAI,
SRI.JOSON MANAVALAN,
SRI.KURYAN THOMAS,
SRI.NITHIN GEORGE.
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 06-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
rs.
Con.Case(C).No. 2047 of 2016 (S)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:-
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.27217/2013
DATED 13/03/2015.
ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.A. NO.1178/2016
DATED 08/07/2016.
ANNEXURE A3 COPY OF THE COVERING LETTER DATED 17/08/2016.
ANNEXURE A4 COPY OF THE ORDER IN SLP(C) NO.30037/2016
DATED 24/10/2016.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.S.TO JUDGE
rs.
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
.........................................
Contempt of Court Case No.2047 of 2016
in
W.P.(C).No.27217 of 2013
..........................................
Dated this the 6th day of December, 2017.
JUDGMENT
It is submitted by the parties that the principal amount of Rs.84,10,255/- has been paid by the respondent. The petitioner claims interest for the belated payment.
Since there was no direction to pay interest, it will not be proper for this Court to award interest to the petitioner. However, the petitioner is at liberty to agitate the claim for interest by separate proceedings. With the liberty as above, the contempt of court case is closed.
Sd/-
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.
cl