M/S.Webuild (P) Ltd vs Anil.S
2021 Latest Caselaw 6175 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.1195 OF 2017(S) IN WP(C). 13668/2017

 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 12.04.2017 IN WPC 13668/2017 OF HIGH COURT
                              OF KERALA


PETITIONER:

                M/S.WEBUILD (P) LTD.
                AGED 77 YEARS, S/O.LATE CHELLAPPAN, HAVING ITS REGISTERED
                OFFICE AT TC NO.16/1713, JAGATHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
                REPRESENTED BY SRI.C.KAMALASSANAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR,
                WEBUILD (P) LTD, AGED 77, S/O.LATE CHALLAPPAN, RESIDING AT
                SRUTHI, TC 16/712, JAGATHY,THIRUVANANTHPAURAM.

                BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI

RESPONDENT/S:

       1        ANIL.S
                PROJECT MANAGER, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT,KERALA
                SUSTAINABLE URABAN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT, 5TH FLOOR,
                TRANS TOWERS VAZHUTHAVACAUD,
                 THIRUVAANTHPAURAM-695 033.

       2        ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED:

                MOHAMMED SAGIR
                MISSION DIRECTOR, STATE MISSION MANAGEMENT UNIT, AMRUT,
                LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF
                KERALA, T.C NO.15/166, VIPANCHIKA ANNEX, ALTHARA NAGAR,
                BEHIND VELLAYAMBALAM TELEPHONE EXCHANGE,
                THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 012.

                (ADDL.R2 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 28.11.2019 IN I.A.
                NO. 765/2017)

                R2 BY 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:
 C.O.(C) No. 1195/2017
in W.P.(C) No. 13668/2017                 :2:




              Dated this the 19th day of February, 2021.

                             JUDGMENT

This Contempt Case is filed complaining that the directives

contained in the judgment dated 12.04.2017 in W.P.(C) No. 13668 of

2017 is not complied with.

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

consideration, it is submitted that the directions have already been

complied with.

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