Rajagopalan K vs Aliamma
2022 Latest Caselaw 4193 Ker

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
THURSDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 17TH CHAITHRA, 1944
                 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1398 OF 2021


 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C).NO.35708/2018 OF THE HIGH
                       COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

    1       RAJAGOPALAN K.,
            S/O. LATE APPUNNI, KANJIRAMGATTIL, SAHYADRI
            COLONY, CHANDRANAGAR, PALAKKAD
    2       ANCY JOSE K.,
            IPP CENTRE, KODUMBU, PALAKKAD.
            BY ADVS. M/S. P.R.VENKATESH & G.KEERTHIVAS


RESPONDENTS/1ST RESPONDENT:

            ALIAMMA, SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, LAND TRIBUNAL,
            OTTAPALAM (ERSTWHILE LAND TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD-II
            679 101


            SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SR.GOVT.PLEADER


        THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP
FOR ADMISSION ON 07.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Cont. Case (C) No. 1398/2021

                                     ..2..




                        ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Cont. Case (C) No. 1398 of 2021
            (arising out of impugned judgment dated 1.11.2018 in
                            WP(C).No.35708/2018)
   -------------------------------------------------------------------------
                   Dated this the 7th day of April, 2022

                               JUDGMENT

Today, when the matter has been taken up for consideration,

Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader, would

submit on the basis of instructions that the direction to the

respondent Land Tribunal, Palakkad, to consider and dispose of

the O.A. has now been complied with, and orders have been passed

in the said O.A. as per order dated 9.3.2022.

2. However,Sri.P.R.Venkatesh, learned counsel appearing

for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners are

aggrieved by the directions in the said proceedings to the extent

there is a direction that the petitioners will have to initiate fresh

Suo Motu proceedings, which according to the petitioners is

unwarranted in the light of the judgment of this Court in Cont. Case (C) No. 1398/2021

..3..

CRP (LR) No.288/2012, and that liberty may be accorded by this

Court to the petitioners herein, to challenge that part of the order

of the Land Tribunal, to the extent the petitioners have the

abovesaid complaint.

3. It is made clear that in case, the petitioners have any

legally justiciable grievances in relation to the abovesaid decision

taken by the Tribunal, then they will be at liberty to workout their

remedies in the manner known to law, and all contentions

available to them in law are left open to be raised and decided in

such appropriate proceedings.

Recording the submissions of both sides, and with the said

liberty, the above Contempt of Court case will stand disposed of.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

MMG Cont. Case (C) No. 1398/2021

..4..

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C).NO.1398/2021

PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE 1 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 25-07-2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH COUNSEL.

ANNEXURE 2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22-10-2019 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH COUNSEL.