IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2007 / 18TH ASWINA 1929 Con.Case(C).No. 1204 of 2007(S) ------------------------------- JUDGMENT IN WPC.22211/2005 Dated 26/07/2005 .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C): ------------------------------------------------ RAJALEKSHMI, W/O.LATE NARAYANAN NAIR, AGED 68, AHTRASSERY PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, MUVATTUPUZHA VILLAGE,COLLEGE ROAD,MUVATTUPUZHA P.O MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.SAJI RESPONDENT: 1ST RESPONDENT IN WP(C): ------------------------------------- MR. MUHAMMED HANEESH (FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SHYSON P.MANGUZHA. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. .......................................................... CONT. CASE (C) No.1204 OF 2007 ........................................................... DATED THIS THE 10TH OCTOBER, 2007 J U D G M E N T Even though Sri.C.P.Saji, counsel for the petitioner would very strenuously argue that Annexure-R1(a) order does not amount to a meaningful compliance of my directions, I am unable to agree with the same. Considering Ext.R1(a) I find that my directions have been complied with. The delay caused in the matter of compliance is only to be condoned in the circumstances of the case. I close the Contempt of Court Case since I am of the view that no case is made out for initiation of action for contempt. However, statutory remedies which are available to the petitioner are not foreclosed, if the petitioner continues to feel aggrieved by the decision taken by the Collector as per Ext.R1(a). (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) tgl WP(C)N0. -2- WP(C)N0. -3-