Mathew Thomas vs P.Anitha
2021 Latest Caselaw 2306 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

   WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 30TH POUSHA, 1942

         Con.Case(C).No.1892 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 34361/2019

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 34361/2019(U) OF HIGH COURT OF
                              KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

             MATHEW THOMAS, AGED 55,
             S/O.K.J.THOMAS,KALATHIPARAMBIL HOUSE,
             KUNNUMMA VILLAGE,KAVALAM.P.O,
             ALLEPPEY DISTRICT,PIN-688506,REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER
             OF ATTORNEY HOLDER FR.KURUVILA VARGHESE,AGED 46
             YEARS,S/O.M.J.VARGHESE,
             MAROTTIKKAL HOUSE,T.V.PURAM.P.O,
             VAIKOM,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,PIN-686606.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.P.K.SOYUZ
             SRI.E.V.BABYCHAN

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.3:

             P.ANITHA
             (FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE
             PETITIONER),AGRICULTURAL OFFICER AND CONVENOR OF
             LLMC,THRIKKAKARA MUNICIPALITY,KRISHI BHAVAN,
             THRIKKAKARA,KAKKANAD.P.O,ERNAKULAM,PIN-682030.

             SRI. MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL - SR.GP

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C).No.1892 OF 2020

                                 2


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 20th day of January 2021

This contempt case has been filed alleging that the

directions in the judgment dated 16.12.2019 in W.P.(C)

No.34361/2019 have not been yet complied with.

2. However, the learned Senior Government Pleader

Sri.Mathew George Vadakkel, submitted that a memo, dated

19.01.2021, has been filed, producing along with it the order

of the respondent dated 15.01.2021, whereby the petitioner's

property has been decided to be removed from the Data Bank.

The learned Senior Government Pleader, therefore, prayed

that this contempt case be closed.

3. When I examine the oder of the respondent dated

15.01.2021, produced along with the memo of the learned

Senior Government Pleader, it is clear that it is not a final

order but only informs the petitioner that a decision has been

taken to remove his property from the Data Bank. Obviously,

therefore, necessary action in terms of this proceedings will

have to be now taken without any further delay.

In the afore circumstances, I dispose of this contempt

case, directing the respondent to ensure that final action with Con.Case(C).No.1892 OF 2020

respect to the removal of the petitioner's property from the

Data Bank is completed within a period of one month from

today; failing which, the petitioner will be at liberty to seek a

rehearing of this case.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

Stu JUDGE Con.Case(C).No.1892 OF 2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE I TRUE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.

(C)NO.34361 OF 2019 DATED 16.12.2019

ANNEXURE II TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED 06.01.2020.