IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2009 / 8TH SRAVANA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 703 of 2009(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.11621/2009 Dated 07/04/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER: ---------------------------------- K.F.NOUSHAD, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL AZEEZ, GENREAL SECRETARY, PMHR, PAVUKKARA P.O., MANNAR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VINOD J.DEV SRI.PRAMOD J.DEV RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT NO.2: -------------------------------------------- MOHANAN, AGED 45 YEARS, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, THE SECRETARY, VENMANI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VENMANI, CHENGANNUR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD FOR R1 THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ Contempt Case (C) NO. 703 OF 2009 (S) =========================== Dated this the 30th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T WP(C) No.11621/2009 was disposed of by judgment dated 7th April, 2009 directing that necessary action should be taken on Ext.P4 complaint made by the petitioner, for receiving possession of the puramboke property, which was stated to be encroached upon by the 5th respondent. It was complaining that the directions in the said judgment have not been complied with, this petition is filed. 2. In the counter affidavit dated 20th of July 2009 filed by the respondent, though an attempt was made to contend that there has not been any inaction on his part, the explanation was unsatisfactory. Therefore by order dated 20/7/2009, he was directed to appear in person. In compliance with the said order, respondent is present today and has filed an additional affidavit, from which it is seen that acting upon Ext.P4 complaint of the petitioner, possession of the property encroached upon has been resumed. 3. In view of the above, though belatedly, the direction in COC 703/2009 :2 : the judgment has been complied with. True, there has been a delay in complying with the judgment and the conduct of the respondent cannot be approved. Still, having regard to the fact that now the directions have been complied with, the contempt petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp