Valsamma George vs Martin George
2021 Latest Caselaw 1273 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                             PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

   WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 23TH POUSHA, 1942

         Con.Case(C).No.1998 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20221/2020

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 20221/2020(C) OF HIGH COURT OF
                              KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C):

             VALSAMMA GEORGE
             AGED 61 YEARS
             W/O. LATE GEORGE MATHEW, PANAKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
             MUTTUCHIRA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,PIN-686 613

             BY ADV. SRI.P.M.JOSEPH

RESPONDENT/9TH RESPONDENT IN WP(C):

             MARTIN GEORGE
             AGED 32 YEARS
             S/O. C.M. GEORGE, PROPRIETOR, 'SAMUDRA MART',
             RESIDING AT CHANDITHURUTHEL HOUSE, MUTTUCHIRA P.O.,
             KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 613

              BY ADV. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 13.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C).No.1998 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20221/2020

                                     2


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 13th day of January 2021

This contempt case was filed alleging violation

of interim order passed by this court dated

15.10.2020. The petitioner in this contempt case is

the writ petitioner. This court by an interim order

dated 15.10.2020 restrained conducting fish and meat

stall by the 9th respondent. 9th respondent entered

appearance before passing the order. It is alleged

in the contempt case that from 16.10.2020 to

18.10.2020, the respondent in violation of the

interim order conducted the stall. A police

complaint was registered by the petitioner. The

police noted that there are slice of beef and pork

in three buckets. The 9th respondent submits that he

has not conducted sale and he was removing the stock

available with him and no contempt is made out.

2. There is no evidence to show that sale has

taken place except noting that 3 buckets of beef and

pork are available. There is nothing on record to

show that the respondent was engaged in the sale of Con.Case(C).No.1998 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20221/2020

those items.

In such circumstances, I am of the view that no

prima facie case is made out for proceeding against

the respondent. Accordingly the contempt case is

closed.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE SAS/13.01.2021 JUDGE Con.Case(C).No.1998 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20221/2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE-A1 ORIGINAL ORDER IN WPC NO.20221/2020 DATED 15.10.2020 OF THE HON'BLECOURT

ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 19.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT

ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 23.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT UNDER RTI ACT

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:-

ANNEXURE-R1 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT SIGNED ON DATED 20.10.2020 OBTAINED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE