IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT:- THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2008 / 21ST POUSHA 1929 Cont.Case(C).No.1775 of 2007(S) ----------------------------------------------------------------- ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGEMENT IN M.F.A.NO.997 OF2001 DATED 03/07/2007 .................... PETITIONER/ADDITIONAL 3RD RESPONDENT:- ------------------------------------------------------------------- M.K.UNNI NAYAR (KAIMAL OF EDATHARA), AGED 94, S/O.LATE DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI, MANAGING TRUSTEE, SRI CHENGATTOOR AYYAPPANKAVU DEVASWOM, EDATHARA - 678 611 (PERUR NAIR HOUSE, PERUR -679 302, OTTAPALAM). BY ADV.SRI.E.R.VENKATESWARAN RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:- --------------------------------------------------- SHRI N.K.SASIDHARAN, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE CUSTODIAN OF VESTED FORESTS, ARANYA BHAVAN, FOREST COMPLEX, RAILWAY COLONY ROAD, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD. BY SPECIAL GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN. THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:- H.L.Dattu,C.J. & K.M.Joseph,J. ------------------------------------------------------------ Cont.Case (C).No.1775 of 2007-S ------------------------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 11th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu,C.J. Alleging that the respondent has not complied with the orders and directions issued by this Court in M.F.A.No.997 of 2001 dated 3.7.2007, the additional 3rd respondent in the appeal has presented this contempt petition. (2) Sri.Renjith Thampan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, would inform us that, aggrieved by the orders and directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid appeal, the State has preferred Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court has admitted the Special Leave Petition. (3) In view of the pendency of the Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court, for the present we do not intend to take cognizance of the contempt petition filed by the complainant. Therefore, the contempt petition requires to be dropped and it is dropped. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice K.M.Joseph Judge vku/-