Dr.Najeeb Kassim vs Jafar Malik I A S
2021 Latest Caselaw 23002 Ker

Con.Case(C) No.1892/2021                    1/3

                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                          PRESENT
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
           Tuesday, the 23rd day of November 2021 / 2nd Agrahayana, 1943
           CONTEMPT CASE(CIVIL) NO. 1892 OF 2021(S) IN WP(C) 20442/2020
   PETITIONER/PETITIONER

           DR.NAJEEB KASSIM,AGED 48,S/O KASIM, PAYIKKATTU HOUSE, AREEKULAM
           VILLAGE, OORALLOOR P.O.KOYILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT-673 620

         BY ADVS.P.K.SOYUZ,E.V.BABYCHAN,
   RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.1

           JAFAR MALIK I.A.S,DISTRICT COLLECTOR,ERNAKULAM,COLLECTORATE,CIVIL
           STATION,KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 030

           GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR RESPONDENT

        This Contempt of court case (civil) having come up for orders on
   23.11.2021, the court on the same day passed the following:
                                      ORDER

Con.Case(C) No.1892/2021 2/3

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.

---------------------------------

Cont. Case No.1892 of 2021 in W.P.(C) No. 20442 of 2020

----------------------------------

Dated this the 23rd day of November, 2021

ORDER

When this matter was taken up, Sri. P.K. Soyuz, the learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner submitted that this Court, by judgment dated 30.09.2020, had ordered the

1st respondent to take up Ext.P5 appeal and pass orders within a period of five weeks. It

is submitted that more than a year has elapsed and to date, no orders have been passed.

2. On instructions, it is submitted by the learned Government Pleader that on

20.11.2021, the matter was heard and some more time is required for finalising the

proceedings.

3. It appears that the hearing was conducted only after the contempt case was

filed. Prima facie, it appears that there are serious latches on the part of the respondent. If

the directions in the judgment are not complied with within a period of two weeks from

today, the respondent shall appear in person to answer why action shall not be taken for

wilfully violating the directions issued.

Post on 9.12.2021.

Sd/-

                                                        RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V,
                                                                 JUDGE
     NS




23-11-2021                          /True Copy/                                 Assistant Registrar
 Con.Case(C) No.1892/2021                   3/3

                           APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1892/2021
Exhibit P5                  TRUE COPY OF   THE APPEAL IN FORM NO.B DATED 11/08/2020