Francis.P vs Subash Babu
2021 Latest Caselaw 6105 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

     FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 30TH MAGHA,1942

       Con.Case(C).No.2036 OF 2017(S) IN WP(C). 17695/2017

 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 17695/2017 DATED 29-05-2017 OF HIGH
                         COURT OF KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

             FRANCIS.P.
             S/O. AUGUSTINE, AGED 40 YEARS,
             PALAYIL HOUSE, KUPPADI PO.,
             SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD, PIN-673592

             BY ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN

RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT IN WP(C):

SUBASH BABU AGED NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER,FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,SULTHAN BATHERY, PIN-673122

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2021, ALONG WITH Con.Case(C).2040/2017(S), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Con.Case(C).Nos.2036 & 2040 OF 2017 IN WP(C). 17695/2017

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 30TH MAGHA,1942

Con.Case(C).No.2040 OF 2017 IN WP(C). 17957/2017

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 17957/2017 DATED 30-05-2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

SHYMON E K, AGED 37 YEARS S/O. KARUNAKARAN,12/761,ONASSERY HOUSE, PAZHERY, KUPPADI.P.O., SULTHAN BATHERY, WAYANAD 673 592

BY ADV. SRI.PRASAD CHANDRAN

RESPONDENT/S:

SUBASH BABU AGED NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, SUB REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICE, SULTHAN BATHERY,PIN-673 122

R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER

THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.02.2021, ALONG WITH Con.Case(C).2036/2017(S), THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Con.Case(C).Nos.2036 & 2040 OF 2017 IN WP(C). 17695/2017

COMMON JUDGMENT Dated this the 19th day of February 2021

These contempt cases are filed complaining that the

directives contained in the judgments in W.P.(C).Nos.17695 of

2017 & 17957 of 2017 dated 29.05.2017 and 30.05.2017, is

not complied with.

2. However, today when this matter was taken up,

the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the

directions are complied with. Therefore, I do not find any

reason to pursue the contempt cases, any further.

The Contempt of Court cases are closed, accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

VPK Con.Case(C).Nos.2036 & 2040 OF 2017 IN WP(C). 17695/2017

APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 2036/2017

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.17695 OF 2017 DATED 29.05.2017 Con.Case(C).Nos.2036 & 2040 OF 2017 IN WP(C). 17695/2017

APPENDIX OF Con.Case(C) 2040/2017 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C) NO.17957 OF 2017 DATED 30.05.2017