Alex Raphel vs Rahesh Kumar R
2023 Latest Caselaw 3974 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 3974 Ker
Judgement Date : 30 March, 2023

Kerala High Court

Alex Raphel vs Rahesh Kumar R on 30 March, 2023

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                     PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
                                        &
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
     THURSDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 9TH CHAITHRA, 1945
                        CON.CASE(C) NO.61 OF 2023
   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 1722/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

             ALEX RAPHEL
             AGED 33 YEARS, S/O RAPPAI, OLLUKKARAN HOUSE,
             1197/25, KURIACHIRA P.O, THRISSUR - 680 006.

             BY ADVS.
             A.R.NIMOD
             M.A.AUGUSTINE


RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

             RAHESH KUMAR R.
             FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,
             AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY,
             THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR - 680 001.

             BY ADV SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL


     THIS    CONTEMPT   OF   COURT    CASE     (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 30.03.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 Cont. Case (C)No.61 of 2023
                                   2


                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 30th day of March, 2023

S. Manikumar, C.J.

Alleging disobedience of the directions issued in the

judgment in W.A.No.1722 of 2021 dated 21.03.2022, instant

contempt case is filed.

2. Mr.M.A. Augustine, learned counsel for the petitioner,

submitted that the directions issued have been complied with.

3. To that effect, a counter affidavit dated 22.02.2023 is

also filed by the respondent in the contempt petition.

4. Relevant paragraphs of the counter affidavit are

reproduced:

"2. The above case has been filed alleging violation of the directions contained in the judgment in WA.No. 1722/21. As per the judgment in the Writ Appeal this Hon'ble Court has directed the appellant Corporation to seek necessary variation of the detailed Town Planning Scheme in conformity with the Master Plan taking into account the development that have taken place in the area.

3. The council in its meeting dated 31/8/22 had taken a decision to permit change of occupancy as sought for by the petitioner herein in the light of the revised Master Plan. Consequent to the decision taken by the council an Cont. Case (C)No.61 of 2023

order has been passed by me in my capacity as the Secretary of the Corporation permitting change of occupancy to commercial occupancy as requested by the petitioner.

4. The direction contained in the judgment in Writ Appeal was to consider the variation of the provisions of the detailed Town Planning Scheme in accordance with the Master Plan. The council has decided to accept the request of the petitioner on 31/8/22 on the basis of which an order has been passed permitting change of occupancy. Hence the directions issued by this Hon'ble Court has already complied with. A copy of Annexure- R1(a) order has been served upon the petitioner."

Placing on record the above, we are of the view that

nothing survives in this petition for further adjudication.

Contempt petition is, accordingly, closed.

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand

closed.

Sd/-

S. Manikumar Chief Justice

Sd/-

Shaji P. Chaly Judge vpv Cont. Case (C)No.61 of 2023

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 61/2023

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure-A TRUE COPY OF THIS JUDGMENT RENDERED IN W.P.(C). NO.16325/2021 DATED 07.09.2021.