Sinto Mathew vs Smt. Juju K. M
2024 Latest Caselaw 12343 Ker

Kerala High Court

Sinto Mathew vs Smt. Juju K. M on 20 May, 2024

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
         MONDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 30TH VAISAKHA, 1946
                         CON.CASE(C) NO. 1046 OF 2024
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.03.2024 IN WP(C) NO.22547 OF 2023 OF HIGH
COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

           SINTO MATHEW, AGED 39 YEARS
           PARIDYADAN HOUSE, KUTTIKADU DESOM,
           MOTHIRAKKANNI P.O. THRISSUR DISTRICT,
           PIN - 680724

           BY ADVS.
           BIJU MARTIN
           P.V.PAULSON



RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:

           SMT. JUJU K. M.,AGED 50 YEARS
           HUSBAND'S NAME IS NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
           THE SUB REGISTRAR, OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR,
           CHALAKUDY, CHALAKUDY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT,
           PIN - 680307

OTHER PRESENT:

           GP - DEEPA V



     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case (C) No.1046 of 2024
          in                                    2
W.P.(C) No.22547 of 2023




                                  VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
                  .................................................................
                         Con.Case (C) No.1046 of 2024
                                                 in
                             W.P.(C) No.22547 of 2023
                  .................................................................
                      Dated this the 20th day of May, 2024


                                        JUDGMENT

Above contempt of court case is filed alleging that issuance of

Annexure-2 order is in violation of the directions in Annexure-1 judgment.

2. This Court as per Annexure-1 judgment dated 20.03.2024 in W.P.(C)

No.22547 of 2023 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the 2 nd

respondent to accept Ext.P6 settlement deed for registration and register

the same without insisting for an ROR certificate if Ext.P6 settlement deed

is in order and if there are no other impediments for registration of Ext.P6

settlement deed. Now the registration has been rejected as per Annexure-2

communication for the reasons other than non-production of ROR

certificate. In view of the same, the contention that Annexure-2 order has

been issued in violation of the directions in Annexure-1 judgment cannot be

accepted.

After hearing both sides, I am of the view that if the petitioner is

aggrieved by Annexure-A2 he has to challenge the same in appropriate

proceedings. Reserving such right the above contempt of court case is

closed.

Sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM JUDGE

cks

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1046/2024

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.03.2024 IN W.P. ( C). NO. 22547 OF

Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 12.04.2024

Annexure 3 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED 12.04.2024