IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 24TH MAY 2010 / 3RD JYAISHTA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 482 of 2010(S) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.A.ABDULKHADER, S/O. AHAMMED, AGED 59 YEARS, CONTRACTOR, MELETHUPADINJARE PUTHENPURAYIL, CHELAKULAM, VENGOLA POST, PIN - 683 554, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.J.JOSEPH SMT.M.V.LIGI RESPONDENT(S): CONTEMNERS/RESPONDENTS. -------------------------------------- 1. SUBRAMANIAN, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, SECRETARY, VAZHAKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MARAMPILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. HASRAMOL, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, VAZHAKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, VAZHAKULAM, MARAMPILLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV. DR.K.P.SATHEESAN FOR R SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR FOR R GP SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- C.O.C.482/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 24th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT Heard both sides. 2. W.P.(C).8425/2010 was disposed of by judgment dated 26.3.2010. The claim of the petitioner is that for the work of constructing the Panchayat office building, he has not been paid his dues. Considering the objections that were raised by the Panchayat in the matter, this Court directed that the petitioner shall report before the Panchayat for a joint measurement and also directed that once measurement is taken, Panchayat will pay the petitioner the admitted amounts. It was also clarified that acceptance of the payment shall be without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to dispute the accuracy of the measurement or the quantification of the amount due. It is complaining of disobedience of the directions in the judgment, the petition has been filed. C.O.C.482/10 2 3. Counter affidavits have been filed by respondents 1 and 2. From the counter affidavits it is evident that although respondents have denied the allegation of disobedience of the directions, according to them, though belatedly a joint measurement has been completed and as a matter of procedure, petitioner has to affix his signature on the joint measurement book. It is stated that because of the refusal on the part of the petitioner to do that, further action in pursuance to the direction in the judgment could not be taken. 4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner disputes the correctness of the entries made in the measurement book, as, according to him, the correct figures are not included. According to him, signing the measurement book will amount to accepting the measurements recorded. In my view, if the petitioner has dispute about the accuracy of measurement or the accuracy of the entries in the book or the quantification of the amount that is due to him, the judgment itself reserves his right to take recourse to the remedies that are available to him. Therefore, the C.O.C.482/10 3 fact that he has a dispute about the accuracy of the entries in the measurement book is not a reason for refusal to affix his signature on the measurement book. 5. In the facts as above, I do not find any wilful contempt for initiating proceedings against the respondents. However, in order to give a quietus to the issue and having regard to the stand taken by both sides, it is ordered that the petitioner shall affix his signature on the measurement book or the joint measurement book, as the case may be. This shall be without prejudice to the contention of the petitioner that the joint measurement recorded in the book is incorrect and he will be free to challenge the same in other appropriate proceedings. It is directed that once the petitioner signs the measurement books as above, the admitted amount due to the petitioner shall be disbursed to him without any further delay, at any rate, within ten days on the petitioner affixing his signature. 6. It is once again clarified that the fact that the petitioner has C.O.C.482/10 4 signed the measurement book or the joint measurement book or that he has accepted the payment, shall be without prejudice to the petitioner's all contentions and objections about the accuracy of the measurement or the quantification of the amounts that are due to him. 7. As suggested by the learned counsel for the respondents, it is ordered that the petitioner shall appear before the 2nd respondent on 26.5.2010 at 11.00 am for affixing signature. COC is accordingly closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs