N.Shajahan vs Sheeba George
2024 Latest Caselaw 10591 Ker

Kerala High Court

N.Shajahan vs Sheeba George on 11 April, 2024

Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas

Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
         Thursday, the 11th day of April 2024 / 22nd Chaithra, 1946
          CONTEMPT CASE(C) NO. 742 OF 2024(S) IN WP(C) 16740/2023

PETITIONER/1ST PETITIONER:


     N.SHAJAHAN, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O NOOR MUHAMMED ABBAS,
     PROPRIETOR, SHAJI TRADERS, MARKET ROAD, MUNNAR DAILY MARKET,
     MUNNAR P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 612.

    BY ADVOCATE SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5:


  1. SHEEBA GEORGE, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KUYILIMALA P.O.,
     IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 601.
  2. ALEX BABY, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT,
     PIN - 685 612.
  3. RAJAN K ARAMANA, STATION HOUSE OFFICER, MUNNAR POLICE STATION,
     MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 612.
  4. SANAL, SECRETARY-IN-CHARGE, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUNNAR P.O.,
     IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 612.
  5. THANKARAJ, TATA GLOBAL BEVERAGES LTD. (ERSTWHILE TATA TEA LTD),
     REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE, G.H COMPOUND,
     MUNNAR P.O., IDUKKI, PIN - 685 612.

      GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 TO R3

     This Contempt of court case (civil) having come up for orders on
11.04.2024, the court on the same day passed the following:



                                                                 P.T.O.
                                 BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
                              -----------------------------------------
                               Con. Case(C). No.742 of 2024
                             -------------------------------------------
                            Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024


                                             ORDER

While the respondents asserted that the judgment has been

complied with, the learned counsel for the petitioner refuted the same

and offered to take out an Advocate Commissioner. In the

circumstances, fourth respondent shall file an affidavit regarding the

allegations in the contempt case. It is clarified that if an Advocate

Commissioner is required to be appointed and ultimately it is found that

the judgment has not been complied with, the entire cost of this

contempt case, including the Advocate Commissioner's Batta will have

to be borne by the fourth respondent.

Post on 23.05.2024.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE

Jka/11.04.24

11-04-2024 /True Copy/ Deputy Registrar