IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2008 / 28TH ASWINA 1930 Con.Case(C).No. 1193 of 2008(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.8226/2008 Dated 11/03/2008 .................... PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ----------------------------------- M.KANNAN, AGE 57 YEARS, S/O. MUTHU, THONIPALLAM HOUSE, PALANKARA, MANJAPRA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. Y.SHAJAHAN, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, PALAKKAD. 2. GOPALAN, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER,TAHSILDAR,ALATHUR. 3. ABDUL RAHIM, FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN, AGED NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, TALUK SURVEYOR, ALATHUR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.T.B.REMANI THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== Cont.Case (C) NO. 1193 OF 2008 (S) ======================= Dated this the 20th day of October, 2008 J U D G M E N T The allegation of contempt is on the basis that the direction in Annexure A judgment in WP(C) NO.8226/08 has not been complied with. Along with the affidavit filed by the 2nd respondent, copy of the order dated 27/9/08 passed in compliance with the judgment has been produced. If that be so, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the same, it is up to him to pursue the matter before the appropriate forum. Now that the order has been passed as above, I see no reason to continue with the contempt of court proceedings. Therefore without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the order dated 27/9/08, contempt of court case is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp