K.Suresh vs George Poulose
2021 Latest Caselaw 8361 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                   PRESENT

                  THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

           FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 21ST PHALGUNA, 1942

              Con.Case(C).No.737 OF 2018(S) IN WP(C). 26451/2017

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 26451/2017 DATED 12-12-2017 OF HIGH COURT
                             OF KERALA


PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

                 K.SURESH
                 AGED 50 YEARS
                 S/O.LATE KUNJUPILLAI,REMYA BHAVAN, MARAYOOR P.O.,MUNNAR,
                 IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 620, NOW RESIDING A SANDALE, CITIZEN
                 ROAD, AYYAPPANKAVU, COCHIN - 682 018.

                 BY ADV. SRI.A.P.SUBHASH

RESPONDENT/5TH RESPONDENT:

       1         GEORGE POULOSE
                 AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
                 VILLAGE OFFICER, MARAYOOR VILLAGE OFFICE, MARAYOOR,
                 IDUKKI - 685 620.

       2         ADDL. R2 IMPLEADED:
                 SAVIO
                 AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
                 TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
                 (ADDL. R2 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 12-10-2018 IN IA
                 1/2018.)

                 BY SRI. MOHAMMED ANZAR K.J., GOVERNMENT PLEADER



                 SRI.MOHAMMED ANZAR.K.J

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
     12.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 C.O.(C) No. 737/2018
in W.P.(C) No. 26451/2017          :2:




              Dated this the 12th day of March, 2021.

                             JUDGMENT

This Contempt Case is filed complaining that the directives

contained in the judgment dated 12.12.2017 in W.P.(C) No. 26451 of

2017 is not complied with.

2. A direction was issued in respect of grant of pattayam in

favour of the petitioner in regard to a land measuring 2 acres and 83

sq. meters situated in Re-Survey No. 105/12/ part in Block No. 48 of

Marayoor Village.

3. Today, when the matter is taken up, the learned Senior

Government Pleader submitted that already a decision is taken in

accordance with the Land Assignment Act and the Rules to provide

pattayam to the petitioner in respect of the property claimed by him

and mentioned to in the judgment and that some more time is

required to issue pattayam, since the permission from the District

Collector is required.

4. Taking into account the said aspect, I am of the considered

opinion that Contempt Case may be closed giving liberty to the

petitioner to re-open the Contempt Case, if situation warrants. C.O.(C) No. 737/2018

5. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is closed, recording the

above said aspect that necessary steps will be taken to issue pattayam

to the petitioner at the earliest possible after obtaining permission

from the District Collector.

However, I make it clear that if the direction is not complied with

within a reasonable time, the petitioner would be at liberty to reopen

the proceedings.

sd/-

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.

Rv