IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1932 Con. Case(C).No. 1248 of 2009(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.17312/1999 Dated 13/02/2008 .................... PETITIONER: --------------- T.C. ISSAC, S/O.LATE KOCHICKA CHACKO THECHERIL PRAYER, PANDANAD (N) P.O., KALLISSERI, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. MR. ANIL SIVARAMAN MS. APARNA RAJAN RESPONDENT: 3RD RESPONDENT: ------------------------------ C.RAJASEKHARAN NAIR, (FATHERS NAME & AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS, KOLLAM. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. M. P. PRAKASH THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J. CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cont. Case (C) No. 1248 OF 2009 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 15th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon J. This contempt matter arises from the verdict passed by this Court in O.P. 17312 of 2009, which was disposed of as per judgment dated 13.02.2008, giving certain directions. The relevant paragraph containing the directions is as follows : “5. After hearing the learned counsel appearing on either side and on going through the counter affidavit filed by the respondents, I am of the view that this original petition can be disposed of by directing the respondents to furnish to the petitioners a certified copy of the sketch prepared after the survey held on 23.04.1999 pursuant to the direction issued by this Court in Ext. P10 judgment, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The petitioners shall produce a copy of this judgment before 3rd respondent and on receipt of the same, the 3rd respondent shall with notice to the 2nd respondent take steps to furnish to the petitioners a copy of the sketch and plan prepared after the survey held on 23.04.1999. I make it clear that I have not expressed any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioners to obtain possession of the lands situated in Survey No. 872/1/12 of Edamon village”. Cont. Case (C) No. 1248 of 2009 : 2 : 2. Alleging contumacious act on the part of the respondent/contemnor, stating that the directions are still to be complied with, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present contempt matter, wherein notice was ordered on 22.10.2009. Later, observing that the respondent has not furnished copy of the survey sketch prepared pursuant to the survey held on 23.04.1999 to the petitioner, the learned Single Judge referred the matter to this Court for further steps. 3. When the matter came up before this Court earlier, as per the order dated 06.08.2010, the respondent was directed to produce a copy of the sketch prepared after the survey held on 23.04.1999. Though a sketch was produced pursuant to the said order, taking note of the fact that there was some mistake in the the sketch produced, the respondent sought to withdraw the memo dated 31.08.2010, which was permitted by this Court vide order dated 23.09.2010. Thereafter, a copy of the survey sketch, after effecting the corrections, has been produced along with the memo dated 24.09.2010, after serving a copy of the same to the petitioner. 4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submits that, the directions given by this Court have already been complied with and the delay was only because of the Cont. Case (C) No. 1248 of 2009 : 3 : various circumstances, as pointed out in the affidavit filed before this Court. It is also stated that, there is no lapse or wilful disobedience on the part of the respondent in complying with the directions of this Court. 5. After hearing both the sides, we find that, the direction given by this Court has been complied with. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved in any manner, as to the correctness of the sketch, it is open for the petitioner to challenge the same by way of appropriate proceedings before the appropriate Forrum. The contempt matter is closed accordingly. J. CHELAMESWAR, CHIEF JUSTICE P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd