IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 21ST JUNE 2010 / 31ST JYAISTHA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 968 of 2009(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.1655/2009 Dated 24/03/2009 .................... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. PANKAJAKSHY, W/O.PADBHANABHAN, AGED 80, CHOOPRATH, PATTANAKKAD, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. PANKAJAKSHY LALITHA, D/O.PADBHANABHAN, AGED 35, DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------------------- PRASANNAN, AGED 62, S/O.PRABHAKARAN, KOTTARATHIL, PATTANAKKAD, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.VARGHESE C.KURIAKOSE FOR R1 SMT. NISHA BOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- C.O.C No. 968 of 2009 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners are the plaintiffs and the respondent is the second defendant in O.S. No.76 of 1985 on the file of the Additional Munsiff's Court, Cherthala. It is stated that the Commissioner appointed in the case was obstructed by the defendants. The defendants filed I.A. No.3776 of 2008 for issuing directions to the Commissioner as to how the property should be identified and located. The court below dismissed the application leaving it to the discretion of the Commissioner to decide the manner in which he should execute the work. That order was challenged by the defendants in W.P(C) No.1655 of 2009. When the Writ Petition came up for hearing, Sri.J.Omprakash, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents in the Writ Petition (plaintiffs) submitted that the plaintiffs did not have any objection to measure first either the plaintiffs' property or the defendants' property. It was pointed out that the anxiety of the plaintiffs was that the commissioner should be able to execute the work without any obstruction by C.O.C No. 968/2009 2 the defendants. The Writ Petition was disposed of recording those submissions. 2. The grievance of the petitioners in this Contempt Case is that the defendants obstructed the Commissioner again, which necessitated appointment of another Commissioner. That Commissioner was also obstructed by the defendants in executing the work. It is contended that the second defendant (the respondent in the Contempt Case) had violated the orders and directions issued by this Court. 3. When the Contempt Case came up for hearing on 20/8/2009, the respondent appeared in person. Both sides agreed that they would maintain a peaceful atmosphere at the time of execution of the work by the Commissioner. They also assured full cooperation with the Commissioner. The Contempt Case was being adjourned from time to time on the submission that the work of the Commissioner was not completed. 4. Sri. Omprakash, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the Commissioner has completed the work on the basis of the memo submitted by the plaintiffs. What C.O.C No. 968/2009 3 remains is execution of the work by the Commissioner in respect of the matters which the defendants wanted to note. 5. It is not necessary to keep this Contempt Case pending. The undertaking made by both parties before this Court that they would cooperate with the Commissioner and that no outside agency would be permitted by either party to enter into the property during the inspection by the Commissioner is in force. That undertaking is recorded and the Contempt Case is closed. If the petitioners have any further grievance that the respondent or any of the defendants continue to obstruct the Commissioner, they would be free to file another Contempt Case for violation of the order dated 24/03/2009 in W.P(C) No.1655 of 2009 as well as the undertaking made by the parties on 20/8/2009 before this Court. With the aforesaid liberty, the Contempt Case is closed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm