IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2011 / 14TH CHAITHRA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 136 of 2011(S) ------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.31181/2010 Dated 12/10/2010 .................... PETITIONER(S):PETITIONER IN W.P.C. ---------------------------------------------- SYAMALA,D/O.NARAYANAN,AGED 71 YEARS KRISHNA SADANAM,KADAVATTARAM,NEYYATTINKARA BY ADV. SMT.I.SHEELA DEVI RESPONDENT(S): 2ND RESPONDCENT IN W.P.C. -------------------------------------------------------- ABDUL KALAM AZAD,FATHERS NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, WORKING AS DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- Co.C.NO.136 OF 2011(S) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of April, 2011 J U D G M E N T The Writ Petition No.31181/2010 was disposed of by judgment dated 12.10.2010 directing the respondent herein to take action on an application made by the petitioner for survey of the properties situated in R.S. No.213/3 of Tirupuram Village. It is complaining of non-compliance of the above, this contempt petition has been filed. 2. From the affidavit filed by the respondent, it is seen that in pursuance to Annexure-A3 notice a representative of the petitioner appeared before the respondent and on inspection it was found that a portion of the property shown to be that of petitioner's is in Government Puramboke. In view of this Annexure-R1(a) notice was issued to the petitioner requiring production of document of title and other details. 3. From the affidavit filed, it is obvious that there has not been any culpable inaction on the part of the respondent justifying further proceedings in this contempt petition. Co.C.No. 136/2011 :2 : 4. However, counsel for the petitioner points out that in pursuance to Ext.R1(a), documents were produced before the respondent. If that be so, it is for the respondent to conclude the proceedings in pursuance to the direction in the judgment. Contempt Petition is closed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/