IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2011 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 502 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.939/2011 Dated 19/01/2011 .................... PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- M/S.K.K.BUILDERS,PERAVOOR, KANNUR DISTRICT REP.BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER, K.K.MOHANDAS, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.LATE K.K.KUNJIRAMAN, BY ADV. SRI.M.G.KARTHIKEYAN SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. SRI.V.P.JOY,I.A.S, SECRETARY,TAXES (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. SRI.ANIL.X.,I.A.S, THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ADV.SRI. A.J. VARGHESE THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Con.Case(C).No. 502 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES ANNEXURE- A: CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 19.1.2011 IN W.P.(C) No. 939/2011-N OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. ANNEXURE- B: PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYER'S NOTICE DATED 28.4.2011 SENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. PETITIONER'S EXHIBIT: NIL RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE. Kp C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. -------------------------------------------- C.O.(C). NO.502 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June, 2011 JUDGMENT The above captioned C.O.(C) has been filed alleging non- compliance with the directions of this Court in judgment dated 19.1.2011 in W.P.(C).No.939/2011. When this matter is taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the petitioner made available a copy of an order bearing No.XC1-30820/09 dated 7.6.2011. The said order would reveal that the second respondent has passed an order in compliance with the directions in the aforesaid judgment. However, the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that since the said order is one against the petitioner, the petitioner may be given liberty to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. Taking note of the factum of passing of the said order, this C.O.(C) is closed. It is made clear that it will be open to the petitioner to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings. (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE) spc W.P.(C) NO. 2 C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J. JUDGMENT September, 2010 W.P.(C) NO. 3