V.A.Sony vs A.S.Anuja
2021 Latest Caselaw 5636 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

     TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942

         Con.Case(C).No.352 OF 2019 IN WP(C). 10482/2018

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 10482/2018(I) OF HIGH COURT OF
                              KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C):

             V.A.SONY
             AGED 37 YEARS
             VATTATHARA HOUSE, EDA KOCHI, KOCHI - 682 010,
             ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

             BY ADV. SHRI.V.PREMCHAND

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.2 IN W.P.(C):

             A.S.ANUJA
             AGED 45 YEARS
             D/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY,
             CORPORATION OF KOCHI, KOCHI - 682 011, ERNAKULAM
             DISTRICT.


     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 16.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C).No.352 OF 2019                   2

IN WP(C). 10482/2018



                                   JUDGMENT

Dated this the 16th day of February 2021

This contempt petition is filed by the petitioner complaining that the

directives contained in the judgment dated 5.10.2018 is not complied with.

2. The subject issue relates to attempt of the respondent Corporation to

grant licence in favour of the 5 th respondent. Evidently the application

submitted by the 5th respondent was pending consideration before the

Secretary of the Corporation seeking issuance of the D&O licence and direction

was also issued in the judgment in question to consider the said application

also.

3. Today when the matter is taken up, learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner submitted the Secretary of the Corporation has considered he

licence application submitted by the 5th respondent and has granted D&O

licence, which is challenged by filing W.P.(C) No.10229/2019.

4. Thinking either way, I am of the considered opinion that the contempt

petition does not survive in view of the nature of directions issued by this

Court in the judgment in question.

Contempt petition is closed accordingly.

                                                     SHAJI P.CHALY

smv                                                      JUDGE


IN WP(C). 10482/2018




                                 APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE 1                   CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
                             05/10/2018 IN WP(C) NO.10482/2018.

ANNEXURE 2                   TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED
                             24/10/2018.

ANNEXURE 3                   TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 4/12/2018 OF
                             THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE 4                   TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED

05/01/2018 ISSUED FROM THE ZONAL OFFICE.