Hill Top Crusher Unit vs D.Saju
2021 Latest Caselaw 6173 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.1757 OF 2016(S) IN WP(C). 31487/2013

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.10.2015 IN WPC 31487/2013 OF HIGH COURT
                             OF KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

                HILL TOP CRUSHER UNIT
                MELMURI, 27, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER,AHAMED
                @ AYAMUDU PALAKKAN, AGED 57 YEARS,S/O.KUNHIPOCKER HAJI,
                PO MELMURI,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 514.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON
                SMT.KAVERY S THAMPI

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

       1        D.SAJU
                AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
                PETITIONER,NOW WORKING AS THE SECRETARY,MAVELIKKARA
                MUNICIPALITY,MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,PIN-690 101.

       2        M.K.KRISHNAKUMAR
                AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
                PETITIONER,PRESENT SECRETARY, MALAPPURAM
                MUNICIPALITY,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 505.

       3        RAMANAN
                AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS,FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE
                PETITIONER,CHIEF TOWN PLANNER,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001.

                R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS KHAN


                SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE, SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
     19.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CO(C) No. 1757/2016
in W.P.(C) No. 31487/2013          :2:

              Dated this the 19th day of February, 2021.

                             JUDGMENT

This Contempt Case is filed complaining that the directives

contained in the judgment dated 12.10.2015 in W.P.(C) No. 31487 of

2013 is not complied with.

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

counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that challenging the

judgment, W.A. No. 2127 of 2016 was filed and it was allowed as per

judgment dated 09.03.2020.

In that view of the matter, I do not think, anything survives to be

considered in this Contempt Case. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is

closed.

sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

Rv