IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2011 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 133 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.21894/2010 Dated 13/08/2010 .................... PETITIONER: PETITIONER IN WPC. --------------------------------------------- K.VENKITARAMAN, S/O. LATE V.KRISHNAMURTHY, FLAT NO.S-1, ANNAPOORNA APARTMENTS, EDAPPALLY P.O., KOCHI - 24. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SMT.REVATHY P.NAIR RESPONDENT(S): 2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC. ------------------------------------------------------ E.V.BABICHAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, WORKING AS THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV.MR. ANTONY MUKKATH - GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R1 THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Contempt Case (C) No.133 OF 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner complains of non-compliance with the direction in Annexure-I judgment. The direction in Annexure-I judgment reads as follows: “xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to complete the proceedings for issue of legal heirship certificate to the petitioner and issue the same as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment”. Admittedly, the legal heirship certificate has been issued to the petitioner, although belatedly. The contention of the petitioner is that in the certificate, two other persons, who had already relinquished their right in favour of the petitioner, have been included and therefore, there is no strict compliance with the direction in the judgment. I have not directed in the judgment to issue legal heirship certificate to the petitioner alone. Even otherwise the respondents cannot decide as to whether the relinquishment by other legal heirs is correct or not. C.O.C.No.133/11 2 In the above circumstances, I am not inclined to proceed further with the Contempt Case. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd C.O.C.No.133/11 3