IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1875 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.22242/2008 Dated 23/07/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- THOMAS VARGHESE, S/O.LATE VARGHESE, KARUMANKAL HOUSE, PATHAMUTTAM.P.O, KOTTAYAM, C/O.GEORGE VARGHESE, KARUMANKAL HOUSE, PATHAMUTTAM.P.O, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR.P.V, PLANTHANATH HOUSE, POOTHAKUZHY.P.O, PAMPADY, KOTTAYAM.WORKING AS SPECIAL SALES OFFICER, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK, BAKER JUNCTION, KOTTAYAM. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- Cont. case (C).No.1875 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2009 JUDGMENT Perused Annexure A1 judgment and the affidavit of the respondent. I am satisfied that the affidavit discloses fair reasons as to why further action was not proceeded on this matter. Taking into consideration the statement of the respondent that the notice issued to the petitioner was returned unserved, it is directed that the petitioner will appear before the respondent on 12.3.2009 to mark appearance, so that the respondent can fix appropriate date to hear the petitioner and dispose of the matter at the earliest. As regards notice to the auction purchaser, if such notice is not being served, the respondent is also to take note of the contention of the petitioner that the so called auction purchaser is itself a fictitious description. The contempt of court case is closed preserving all rights of the petitioner to remedies in accordance with law. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge kkb.21/2.