Abdul Nazar P.T vs B.M.Jamal
2021 Latest Caselaw 3573 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD

                                 &

             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

     MONDAY, THE 01ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 12TH MAGHA,1942

         Con.Case(C).No.1804 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 2908/2020

   JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 2908/2020 DATED 18.2.2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
                              KERALA


PETITIONER/WRIT PETITIONER:

             ABDUL NAZAR P.T.,
             AGED 47 YEARS
             S/O.MOOSA, PANAYAMTHODIKA,
             ATHANIKAL HOUSE, THOTTINTAKKARA, MAMPAD,
             NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.P.SAMSUDIN
             SRI.M.ANUROOP

RESPONDENT/1ST RESPONDENT:

             B.M.JAMAL
             (AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)
             CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, KERALA WAKF BOARD,
             KALOOR P.O. - 682 017,
             ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

             R1 BY ADV. SHRI.T.K.SAIDALIKUTTY, SC, WAQF BOARD

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 C.O.(C) No.1804/2020               2




                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 1st day of February 2021

Heard the learned counsel for petitioner and respondent.

2. The petitioner approached this Court with this

contempt case alleging that the respondent failed to comply with

the directions in W.P.(C) No.2908 of 2020 issued by this Court

on 18th February, 2020.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that as

directed by this Court, Exhibit P3 application, which was ordered

to be considered within a period of four months, has been taken

up by the respondent and the ultimate decision has to be taken

by the Wakf Board as the matter has been placed before the

Board. Due to Covid 19 pandemic, there was no regular sitting

of the Board.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances, we find no

contumacious conduct on the part of the respondent inviting an

action under the Contempt of Courts Act. Therefore, the

submissions by the learned counsel for the respondent is

recorded and the petition is closed.

Sd/-

A.HARIPRASAD JUDGE

Sd/-

T.V.ANILKUMAR JUDGE csl

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S DOCUMENTS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18/02/2020 IN W.P.(C) NO.2908/2020.

RESPONDENT'S DOCUMENTS :

NIL