IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2011 / 19TH ASWINA 1933 Con.Case(C).No. 465 of 2011(S) ------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.30158/2009 Dated 27/10/2009 .................... PETITIONER(S): 2ND PETITIONER IN W.P.(C): ---------------------------------------------------------------- K.RADHAMANIAMMA,AGED 50 YEARS, W/O LATE P.MOHAN KUMAR,ANU BHAVAN,KAIPUZHA MURI, KULANADA VILLAGE,KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S SMT.REXY ELIZABETH THOMAS RESPONDENTS/1ST AND 2ND RESPONDENTS IN WP(C) AND OTHERS: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.K.SUNDARESAN,AGED NOT KNOWN, S/O.NOT KNOWN,REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, ADOOR. 2. SUGATHAN,AGED NOT KNOWN,S/O.NOT KNOWN, TAHSILDAR,KOZHENCHERRY TALUK OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. RAJU,AGED NOT KNOWN,S/O.NOT KNOWN, ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR,KOZHENCHERRY TALUK OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. SHAJAHAN,AGED NOT KNOWN,S/O.NOT KNOWN, VILLAGE OFFICER,KULANADA. 5. VARGHESE,AGED NOT KNOWN,S/O.NOT KNOWN, TALUK SURVEYOR,KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH FOR R1,2,3,5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. GOPAKUMAR THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Con.Case(C).No. 465 of 2011(S) APPENDIX: PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE A1: THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.10.2009 IN W.P.(C) No.30158/2009. ANNEXURE A2: TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT BEFORE THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PANDALAM ON 22.04.2010 BY THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.A TO JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- Cont. Case (C) No. 465 OF 2011 -------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of October, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel on both sides. It is evident from the materials on record that alleging violation of Annexure A1 judgment the very same petitioner had earlier filed Contempt Case No.923 of 2010 through another counsel and the said contempt case was dismissed by Annexure R1(a) judgment delivered on 6.8.2010. The petitioner has however not adverted to the said fact in this contempt case. Annexure R1(a) judgment has attained finality. I have in that judgment held that the petitioner was evicted on 21.4.2010 after the period of stay passed by this Court expired and therefore no grounds exist to proceed against the respondents under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Such being the situation, no relief can be granted in this contempt case. The contempt case fails and is accordingly dismissed with costs Rs.1,000/- payable to each of the respondents. P.N.RAVINDRAN, (JUDGE) vps WPC No./2011 2