Kerala High Court
N. Suveendran vs Sri. Kalimuthu on 17 June, 2025
2025:KER:42829
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TH
TUESDAY, THE 17 DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 27TH JYAISHTA, 1947
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1135 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
N. SUVEENDRAN
AGED 47 YEARS
S/O. LATE T. NATARAJAN, TC 29/3691(1), MP APPAN
ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695014
BY ADVS.
SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN
SRI.R.GOPAN
RESPONDENT/S:
SRI. KALIMUTHU
(AGE, FATHER'S NAME & RESIDENTIAL ADDRESS NOT KNOWN
TO THE PETITIONER) NOW WORKING AS THE COMMISSIONER,
CGST & CENTRAL EXCISE GST BHAVAN STSTUE, PALAYAM,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ., PIN - 695001
OTHER PRESENT:
SHRI.V.GIRISHKUMAR, SC
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case (c) No. 1135 of 2025
2
2025:KER:42829
JUDGMENT
This Contempt of Court Case is filed by the petitioner in the
writ petitioner, alleging non-compliance of the direction issued by
this Court in the judgment dated 08.04.2025. The writ petition
was filed by the petitioner, seeking various reliefs including a
direction to ensure that the stock of the erstwhile establishment
by name M/s MRT Metal Mart is secured and not clandestinely
removed and sold by the 2nd and 3rd respondent.
2. Earlier, when the writ petition came up for consideration
on 20.3.2025, an interim order was passed directing the
respondents 1 and 4 to seal the godowns of the erstwhile MRT
Metal Mart, as mentioned in the petition, which is I.A No.1/2025.
Accordingly, the godowns of M/S MRT Metal Mart were sealed.
Later, when the writ petition was disposed of, in the operative
portion it was ordered as follows:
"It is clarified that the order dated 20.03.2025 directing to seal the
godowns is confined to the erstwhile MRT Metal Mart godowns and
if any godown other than that of MRT Metal Mart has been sealed,
2025:KER:42829
the aggrieved is at liberty to point it out to the 4 th
respondent in
W.P.(C) No.6509/2025 for appropriate relief."
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that, subsequent to
the judgment, eight godowns of the erstwhile MRT Metal Mart
were released in favour of the respondents 2 and 3, overlooking
the fact that, in Ext.P7 Udyam Registration Certificate obtained by
3rd respondent from the Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium
Enterprises, all the godowns which were released, were included.
Therefore, according to the petitioner, the same amounts to willful
violation of the directions of this Court and therefore, proceedings
under the Contempt of Courts Act have to be initiated.
4. An affidavit has been submitted by the respondents,
explaining the circumstances under which the godowns were
released. The said fact is explained in paragraph 11 and 12 which
reads as follows:
"11. In obedience to the above order, the 1st respondent in
association with the 4lh respondent took necessary steps to seal
the godowns of the erstwhile MRT Metal Mart with GSTIN:
32ABHPN4581F1ZQ in the name of late Shri. T Natarajan. On
examination ofthe GST Certificate ofthe erstwhile MRT Metal
2025:KER:42829
Mart; GSTIN: 32ABHPN4581F1ZQ it was found that the TC Nos.
39/796, 39/814, 39/1413, 39/1413-1, 39/1416, 39/1465-3,
39/1465-4 and 71/5258 mentioned as godowns of the erstwhile
MRT Metal Mart in the Interlocutory Application were not
registered as the godowns of the erstwhile MRT Metal Mart.
12. Nevertheless, in obedience to the Order dated 20.03.2025 ofthe
Hon'ble High Court all the godowns mentioned in Interlocutory
Application including the godowns that were not registered in the
GST Registration Certificate of GSTIN: 32ABHPN4581F1ZQ were
sealed on 22.03.2025 and 24.032025 as the order has directed
to seal the godowns of erstwhile MRT Metal Mart as mentioned in
the petition. However, it was clearly mentioned in the Report of
Sealing dated 24.03.2025 that out of the 20 godowns mentioned
in the IA only 12 were registered godowns ofthe erstwhile MRT
Metal Mart. All the godowns were identified by the petitioner and
all the godowns were sealed in the presence of the petitioner.
True copy of the Report of Sealing dated 24.03.2025 that out
ofthe 20 godowns mentioned in the IA only 12 were registered
godowns ofthe erstwhile MRT Metal Mart is produced herewith
and marked as Annexure Rl(a)"
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and
the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, I find that the
2025:KER:42829
action on the part of the respondents in releasing the godowns,
cannot be treated as an act of contempt of court, even though I
find some force in the contention of the learned counsel for the
petitioner that, Ext.P7 document ought to have been taken into
account before such action. This is because, as the judgment did
not contemplated for any such detailed enquiry and that the
respondents acted upon the registration of the godowns under the
GST Act, I find that the same cannot be treated as a willful act on
the part of the respondents in violation of the directions issued by
this Court. However, if the petitioner has any grievance, with
respect to the same, it is open to the petitioner to raise his
challenge by invoking appropriate statutory remedies.
In such circumstances, this Contempt of Court Case is
closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the
authorities concerned, against the action of the respondents.
Sd/-
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE
rpk
2025:KER:42829
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1135/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A-1 COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
20/03/2025 IN IA NO: 01/2025 IN W.P(C)
Annexure A-2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE COMMON JUDGMENT
IN W.P(C) 1855/2025 AND W.P(C)
6509/2025 DATED 8/4/2025
Annexure A-3 COPY OF THE ADVOCATE NOTICE DATED NIL
SENT TO THE RESPONDENT
Annexure A-4 PHOTOCOPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
CARD
RESPONDENT ANNEXURES
Annexure R1(a) True copy of the Report of Sealing
dated 24.03.2025 that out of the 20
godowns mentioned in the IA only 12
were registered godowns of the
erstwhile MRT Metal Mart
Annexure R1(b) A true copy of the letter dated
10.04.2025 to the 4th respondent
Annexure R1(c) True copy of the Letter F. No.
B1/175(3)/2024-25 dated 11.04.2025 to
the 1st respondent
