Against The Judgment In Wpc ... vs By Adv. Sri.Babu Joseph ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6137 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.127 OF 2017(S) IN WP(C). 29780/2016

 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 29780/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

PETITIONER
              YAKOOB PURAYIL
              S/O.BEERAN HAJI, AGED 56 YEARS,MANAGING PARTNER,
              M/S.ABLE GROUP TRADING CONTRACTORS,
              CORPORATE OFFICE, ABLE COMMERCIAL AVENUE,
              KARASSERY JUNCTION, MUKKAM,KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
              PIN-673 602,(FORMERLY M/S. ABLE GROUP TRADING
              CONTRACTORS,33/M6-24A,
              MALAPARAMBA HOUSING COLONY,MALAPARAMBA PO, KOZHIKODE
              DISTRICT, PIN-673 009)

              BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 3 TO 6:

      1       P. VINEETHAN
              HIS AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE
              PETITIONER, WORKING AS SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
              PWD (ROADS AND BRIDGES) NORTH CIRCLE,
              KOZHIKODE-673 001.

      2       R.SINDHU
              HER AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE
              PETITIONER,WORKING AS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,PWD,
              ROADS DIVISION,KOZHIKODE-673 020.

      3       VINEETH KUMAR
              HIS AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE
              PETITIONER,WORKING AS ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE
              ENGINEER,PWD, ROADS SUB DIVISION,
              KOZHIKODE-673 004.

      4       BIJU
              HIS AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE
              PETITIONER,WORKING AS ASSISTANT ENGINEER,PWD, ROADS
              SECTION, KOZHIKODE-673 004.

              R1, R3 BY SR.GP, SRI.SURING GEORGE IPE

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 19.02.2021, ALONG WITH WP(C).2505/2017(K), THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                               2


Con.Case(C).No.127 OF 2017(S) IN WP(C). 29780/2016




                                    JUDGMENT

Dated this the 19th day of February 2021

This contempt petition is filed complaining

that the directives contained in the judgment dated

21.12.2016 in W.P.(C)No.29780/2016 are not complied

with.

2. However, today when the matter is taken up,

learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the directions are complied with. Therefore, I do

not find any reason to pursue the contempt case any

further.

The Contempt of Court case is closed,

accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE hmh