IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 13TH OCTOBER 2008 / 21ST ASWINA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1235 of 2008(S) ---------------------------------------------- ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.11554/2008 DATED 04/04/2008 .................... PETITIONER/ PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- OUSEPH ANTONY ALIAS KOCHAPPU, S/O LATE ANTONY, MANJALI HOUSE, VELLANKODE, MUTTITHADI P.O., KALOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPRAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AUGUSTIAN, ADV. SRI.T.R.JAGADEESH. RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------ 1. SHRI M.K. KRISHNA KUMAR, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER) THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PEECHY PROJECT SECTION, MANNAMANGALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. SHRI.S.R.SUGUNA NANDAGOPAN, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER) THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HEAD WORKS SUB DIVISION, PEECHY,THRISSUR- 680 659 3. MS. SUSHEELA E.V., (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOW TO THE PETITIONER), THE TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.T. MOHAMMED. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- Contempt of Court Case No.1235/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT Non compliance of the direction in Annexure-I judgment is complained of in this contempt petition. In the judgment, it was directed that, the process of survey in pursuance to Ext.P11 shall be completed, in the manner as directed. It is now pointed out by the respondent in the affidavit filed that the process has been completed and Ext.R2(c) order has been passed, levying penalty on the petitioner. 2. A reading of the affidavit and the documents annexed thereto shows that the direction in the judgment has been complied with. If the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.R2(c), the course open to the petitioner is to seek appropriate remedies against that order. 2 Therefore reserving the liberty of the petitioner to pursue his remedies against Ext.R2(c) this contempt case is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE vi. 3