K.Rajan vs Biju Francis
2021 Latest Caselaw 19102 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 MONDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 22ND BHADRA, 1943
                CON.CASE(C) NO. 1212 OF 2021
   AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18005/2020 OF HIGH
                 COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER/S:

    1     K.RAJAN
          AGED 52 YEARS
          S/O.KRISHNAN CHETTIAN, TC. 21/1959(5), KEEZHATHIL
          VEEDU, NEDUMCAUD, KARAMAN P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695002

    2     HARI.S
          S/O.SREEDHARAN NADAR, TC. 21/1926(2), NEDUMCAUD,
          KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695002

    3     N.ANAND
          TC.21/1956(4), AMRITHAM, NEDUMCAUD, KARAMANA P.O.,
          THIRUVNANTHAPURAM, PIN 695002

    4     LATHA.S
          D/O.RAJAPPAN NADAR, TC. 21/1926(5), NEDUMCAUD,
          KARAMANA PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURA, PIN 695002

    5     K.AYYAPPAN
          S/O.KUTTAN PILLAI, TC. 21/1926(6), NEDUMCAUD,
          KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAUPURAM, PIN 695002

          BY ADV K.P.SUJESH KUMAR



RESPONDENT/S:

          BIJU FRANCIS
          SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MUNICIPAL
          CORPORATION, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695033,
          (FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE
          PETITIONER)
 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1212 OF 2021



                                     -2-



             BY ADVS.
             N.NANDAKUMARA MENON (SR.)
             SHRI.P.K.MANOJKUMAR,SC,TVPM CORPORATION




       THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION       ON     13.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1212 OF 2021



                                           -3-



                                     JUDGMENT

When this matter was called today, the

learned counsel for the respondent submits that the

direction in the judgment of this Court has been

fully complied with and that the resultant order

has also been issued.

2. The learned counsel for the

petitioners submitted that he has no instructions

with respect to the above and sought time to confer

with his client.

Since I have no reason to disbelieve the

submission made by the learned counsel for the

respondent, I close this Contempt of Court Case,

however, leaving liberty to the petitioners to seek

a re-hearing of this case, if he is so advised.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE STK CON.CASE(C) NO. 1212 OF 2021

CON.CASE(C) NO. 1212 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1212/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

Annexure A1` CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN WPC.NO. 18005/2020 DATED 09.09-2020

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENT, DATED 26.05.2021