IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 6TH JUNE 2011 / 16TH JYAISHTA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 477 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ADDL.R3 ---------------------- M.K.BENOY, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. JUNJU PILLAI, PINAM KOTTIN(H), MARADU.P.O, MUVATTUPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.FAYAZ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT NO.1 ------------------------------ R. SAJITH, JOINT REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER, VAIKOM - 686 604. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- Contempt Case (C) No. 477 of 2011 ------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T This contempt of court case is filed alleging that the respondent herein who is the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Vaikom has violated the directions issued by this Court in Annexure-A judgment delivered on 3.3.2011 by not issuing the fresh registration certificate in respect of the stage carriage bearing registration No.KL- 36/A 3575 to the financier. By Annexure-A judgment, I had directed the first respondent in the writ petition, the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Vaikom to issue the fresh registration certificate in respect of the aforesaid vehicle, if the writ petitioner does not pay over to the financier, the sum of Rs.9,77,077/- towards repayment of the loan availed by her and the sum of Rs.50,000/- as compensation to the third respondent in the writ petition, who is the petitioner in this contempt case. The allegation in the contempt case is that though the petitioner in the writ petition did not pay the amount within the time limit stipulated by this Court, the Joint Regional Transport Officer, Vaikom has not issued the fresh registration certificate. I have by order passed on 19.4.2011 in I.A.No.6336 of 2011 enlarged the time fixed for payment till 25.4.2011. It is not in dispute that within the extended time, the payment was also effected. Further, the COC.No. 477/2011 2 petitioner herein had filed W.A.No.547 of 2011 canvassing the correctness of Annexure-A judgment. The writ appeal was allowed by judgment dated 3.5.2011 enhancing the compensation payable to the petitioner in the contempt case. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that no orders are called for in this contempt case. It is accordingly closed. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.