Muhammadali V.P vs Smt. Jayasree. A
2022 Latest Caselaw 11319 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
 FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944
                 CON.CASE(C) NO. 2041 OF 2022
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT    DATED 22.4.2022 IN WP(C) 15857/2021 OF
                       HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C):

          MUHAMMADALI V.P.,AGED 50 YEARS
          S/O. AHAMMAD,VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE,
          KARUVAMBRAM AMSOM, DESOM,KARUVAMBRAM P.O.,
          MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676123
          BY ADVS.
          K.SHIBILI NAHA
          A.LOWSY
          NIVEA K.G.


RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.4 IN WP(C):

          SMT. JAYASREE. A,
          (AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)
          THAHASILDAR (LAND RECORDS)
          TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 679329

OTHER PRESENT:

          SR.GP - ASHWIN SETHUMADHAVAN



     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C) No.2041 of 2022                            2




                                 VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
                 .................................................................
                         Con.Case(C) No.2041 of 2022
                 .................................................................
                 Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2022

                                       JUDGMENT

When the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned

Government Pleader upon instructions submitted that the directions in the

judgment have been complied with and that the order dated 25.11.2022

allowing the request of the petitioner has been produced along with the

memo dated 29.11.2022. An affidavit has been filed by the contemnor

explaining the circumstances in which there is delay in complying with the

directions in the judgment and that he tendered his unconditional apology

for the delay caused and the inconvenience caused to this Court.

Taking into consideration the fact that the order has been duly

complied with and that the contemnor has tendered unconditional apology

for the delay, I am of the opinion that accepting the unconditional apology,

no further proceeding be initiated in this contempt case, and therefore the

application is accordingly closed by reminding the contemnor that orders

passed by this Court should be strictly complied with and any further

violation in future will be viewed seriously.

Sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE cks