Paichudathil Seena vs Sri.Ashraf T.P
2022 Latest Caselaw 1284 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 8TH MAGHA, 1943
                    CON.CASE(C) NO. 2205 OF 2021
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 24107/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
                               KERALA
PETITIONER:

          PAICHUDATHIL SEENA,
          D/O.LATE KUNCHIRAMAN NAMBIAR, VAYAKKARA AMSOM,
          PULINGOM DESOM, KOLWALLI P.O., CHUNDA, PIN-670 511.

          BY ADVS.
          E.N.VISHNU NAMBOODIRI
          P.REJINARK
          NARAYANAN P POTTY
          P.SANKARAN NAMPOOTHIRI
          M.K.SASEENDRAN (MELEL)
          A.K.MAYAKRISHNAN



RESPONDENT:

          SRI.ASHRAF T.P., (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO
          THE PETITIONER),
          VILLAGE OFFICER, KANKOL, KANKOL P.O., VIA PAYYANNUR,
          KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 307.

          BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
          SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SR. GP




     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 CON.CASE(C) NO.2205/2021            2

                              JUDGMENT

When this contempt case was called today, the

learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.K.Amminikutty

submitted that a Memo has been filed on record,

producing therewith the order of the respondent in

compliance with the directions in the judgment. She,

therefore, prayed that this contempt case be closed.

2. Shri.E.N.Vishnu Namboodiri, learned counsel

for the petitioner, replied saying that the contents

of the new order are egregiously improper and

contrary to the spirit of the judgment in question.

He, therefore, prayed that further action in this

contempt case be continued.

3. Even when I hear Shri.E.N.Vishnu Namboodiri

on the afore lines, the fact remains that merits of

the new order issued by the respondent cannot be

considered by this Court in a contempt of court

case. It is certainly up to the petitioner to

challenge it appropriately.

Resultantly, leaving liberty to the petitioner

to challenge the new order issued by the respondent,

I close this contempt case without any further

orders.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/28.1

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2205/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT DATED 16.09.2021 IN WPC NO.24107/2020 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Annexure A2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 02.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TALUK OFFICER, PAYYANNUR.