Kerala High Court
Elias Puliyan vs Joseph @ Jose on 5 April, 2024
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K. Narendran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1946
CON.CASE(C)NO.888 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.03.2019 IN WP(C) NO.6882 OF 2019
OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/WRIT PETITIONER:
ELIAS PULIYAN, AGED 67 YEARS
S/O. LATE OUSEPH, PULIYAN HOUSE, KARAYANPARAMBU,
KARUKUTTY P.O., ERNAKULAM 683 576.
BY ADVS.
ANEESH JAMES
SRI.JIJO THOMAS
SMT.M.D.BEENA
RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT:
JOSEPH @ JOSE, AGED 48 YEARS
S/O. ANTHONY ALUKKAL HOUSE, KARUKUTTY VILLAGE,
KARAYAMPARAMBU KARA, ERNAKULAM 683 576.
BY ADV SRI.M.S.SAJEEV KUMAR
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 05.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2
CON.CASE(C) NO. 888 OF 2019
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this contempt case alleging wilful
disobedience of the directions contained in Annexure A1 order dated
26.03.2019 in W.P.(C)No.6882 of 2019.
2. By the order dated 17.07.2019, this matter was referred to
Division Bench. Paragraphs 5 to 8 of that order read thus;
"5. The pleadings and materials on record would or delay the
same in any manner make it explicitly clear that the respondent
had undertaken further construction of the building, despite
Annexure A1 order of this Court dated 26.03.2019. He had even
opened a tea stall in that building, as evident from Annexure A4
photograph. In paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit, the
respondent has made a false statement that he has obeyed the
orders of this Court and never attempted to disrespect or delay
the same in any manner.
6. In Dhananjay Sharma v. State of Haryana [(1995) 3
SCC 757] the Apex Court held that filing of false affidavit, or
making false statement on oath in courts aims at striking a blow
at the Rule of Law and no court can ignore such conduct which
has the tendency to shake public confidence in the judicial
institutions, because the very structure of an ordered life is put
at stake. It would be a great public disaster if the fountain of
justice is allowed to be poisoned by anyone resorting to filing of
false affidavits or giving of false statements and fabricating false
evidence in a court of law.
7. In Muthu Karuppan, Commissioner of Police, Chennai v.
Parithi Ilamvazhuthi [(2011) 5 SCC 496], the Apex Court
expressed the view that filing of a false affidavit should be
CON.CASE(C) NO. 888 OF 2019
effectively curbed with a strong hand. In Sciemed Overseas
Inc. v. BOC India Limited [(2016) 3 SCC 70], the Apex
Court held that the observations in Muthu Karuppan was made
in the context of contempt of court proceedings, the view
expressed must be generally endorsed to preserve the purity of
judicial proceedings.
8. After considering the pleadings and materials on record, I find
that the petitioner has made out a prima facie case to refer this
Contempt Case to the Division Bench."
3. Thereafter, Registry has posted the matter before this Court,
in view of the order dated 02.02.2021 of the Division Bench in Contempt
Case (C)No.1073 of 2014.
4. Today when this matter is taken up for consideration, the
respondent has filed an affidavit dated 19.02.2024 tendering
unconditional apology. Paragraphs 2 to 4 of the said affidavit read thus;
"2. I respectfully submit that as per Order dated 26.03.2019, this
Hon'ble Court restrained the 3rd respondent from carrying out
further construction in his property situated in Re.Sy.No.266/12-1
in Block-III, Karukutty Village, in view of the Stop Memo issued by
the 2nd respondent.
3. I respectfully submit that I committed a mistake by not
complying with the order of this Hon'ble Court, on time. Even
though I stopped construction, removed the iron frames erected on
top of the existing building and stopped the tea stall, it was done
belatedly, which invited Contempt of Court proceedings against me.
4. I respectfully submit that I am a law abiding citizen and have
utmost respect to the orders of Hon'ble Court. The non-compliance
of the order of this Hon'ble Court was not a willful act but it
happened by mistake, for which I really repent. I will not commit
CON.CASE(C) NO. 888 OF 2019
any such mistakes in future and I hereby tender my apology for all
the mistakes committed by me. I pray for the kindness of this
Hon'ble Court to pardon me for the mistakes committed by me and
for which the accompanying petition is filed."
4. Having considered the unconditional apology tendered as
above by the respondent and the submissions made at the Bar, this
Court is of the view that the contempt of court case can be closed.
Accordingly, this Contempt of Court Case is closed.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN
JUDGE
bkn/-
CON.CASE(C) NO. 888 OF 2019
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 888/2019
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED
26.3.2019 OF THIS HONBLE COURT IN WPC
NO. 6882 OF 2019.
ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
12.4.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO
THE SECRETARY KARUKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED
16.4.2019 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE ANGAMALI POLICE STATION.
ANNEXURE A4 PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF
THE RESPONDENT BUILDING.
