Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

For Information Purpose Only vs By Advocate ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 6952 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 6952 Ker
Judgement Date : 26 February, 2021

Kerala High Court
For Information Purpose Only vs By Advocate ... on 26 February, 2021
Con.Case(C) 563/2020                 1/2



                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  Present:
                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

       Friday,the 26th day of February 2021/7th Phalguna, 1942
     Contempt Case(Civil) No.563/2020(S) in WP(C) No.41508/2017

     For    information purpose only
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C) NO.41508 OF 2017
      DR.C.RAJASEKHARAN,AGED 58 YEARS
      S/O.SIVATHAM, THAIKKAD VILLAGE,VAZHUTHACAUD.,
      M.P.APPAN NAGAR,THAICAUD P.O.,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADVOCATE SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 IN WP(C) NO.41508 OF           2017
1.      DEEPA L.S
        SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION,
        CORPORATION OFFICE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 033.
2.      ANJU.W.C.
        REGIONAL TOWN PLANNER, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING,
        SANTHINAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 001.

SRI. N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SENIOR ADVOCATE) ALONG WITH
SRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR,STANDING COUNSEL FOR R1

     This Contempt of Court Case(Civil) having come up for
orders on 26/02/2021, the Court on the same day passed the
following:


                                                                PTO
 Con.Case(C) 563/2020                     2/2




                                  SHAJI P.CHALY, J.
                                      -----------------
                            Con.Case(C) No.563 of 2020
                                      -----------------
                       Dated this the 26th day of February 2021


      For information purpose only
                   ORDER

The learned counsel for the 1st respondent seeks time for filing an affidavit controverting the allegations made in the Contempt Petition. It was also submitted that in compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the petitioner was directed to produce the layout plan. However, it was not produced and consequent to which further action could not be taken to satisfy the directions contained in the judgment.

Post on 12.03.2021.

Sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

scs

/true copy/ Sd/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter