IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 456 of 2009(S) -------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.25635/2008 DATED 26/08/2008. .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- K.P. SADULI, S/O.K. MUHAMMED, KEELATH PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, PROPRIETOR, M/S.SADHU WOOD BOARD SUPPLY, RAHMANIYA COMPOUND, KOLENCHERRY P.O. BY ADV. SMT.T.RESMI DAMODARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- P.K. MOHANPI, AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, PRINCIPAL CHIEF SONSERVATOR OF FOREST, THE CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Cont. Case (C) No. 456 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 9th June, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner alleges non-compliance with the directions in Annexure I judgment. In Annexure I judgment, I directed the respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext. P4 within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of judgment. Now a counter affidavit has been filed along with which Annexure R(e) has been produced, which is stated to be the order passed pursuant to Annexure I judgment. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that Annexure R(e) communication is dated 27-4-2009, whereas the contempt case itself was filed on 8-4-2009. 2. I am not at all satisfied with the conduct of the 3rd respondent in not passing orders in time as directed in Annexure I judgment. The respondent has not even sought extension of time to comply with the direction. However, taking a lenient view, now that an order has been passed, I close this contempt case without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge Annexure R(e) appropriately. However, because of the conduct of the respondent, I am inclined to direct the respondent to pay costs to the petitioner. I fix the costs as Rs. 2,500/-, which shall be paid within two weeks. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.