IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.R.BANNURMATH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER TUESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2009 / 27TH SRAVANA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 613 of 2009(S) ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN MA.69/2005 Dated 13/11/2007 .................... PETITIONER/IST RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------- SUNU P.SAMUEL,D/O.P.V.SAMUEL, PALAKATHUPEEDIKAYIL,PUTHUKKULAM, MALAYALAPUZHA ERAM P.O.,PATHANAMTHITTA, REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER P.V.SAMUEL, -DO- -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.V.PHILIP MATHEW RESPONDENTS/APPELLANT AND SECOND RESPONDENT ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. AJI JOSEPH,S/O.OMMEN JOSEPH, MANAKALA VADAKECHERUVIL HOUSE,ULANADU P.O., KULANADA,PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. MARIYAMMA,S/O.OOMMEN JOSEPH, -DO- -DO- NOW RESIDING AT 5305,BROOK PORT DR.GARLAND,TEXAS- 75043,U.S.A.,REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, M.J.RAJU,S/O.OOMMEN JOSEPH,MANAKKALA VADAKKECHERUVIL HOUSE,ULLANADU MURI,MEZHUVELI VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK,PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ FOR R2 SRI.L.RAJ MOHAN FOR R2 SRI.SAJJU.S FOR R2 THIS CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.R.Bannurmath, C.J. & A.K. Basheer, J. ------------------------------------------ Cont. Case (C) No.613 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of August, 2009 JUDGMENT Basheer, J. The petitioner herein is the former wife of respondent No.1. It appears that the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.1 with regard to return of money was compromised before the Division Bench of this Court in Mat.Appeal No.69 of 2005. Under the said compromise, respondent No.1 had agreed to pay Rs.2,50,000/- to the petitioner in four instalments within a period of five months from the date of the judgment, viz. November 13, 2007. 2. Thereafter, since respondent No.1 did not comply with the terms of the compromise, the petitioner was constrained to file E.P.No.109 of 2008 before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. At that stage, respondent No.1 filed I.P.No.1 of 2009 before the Subordinate Judge's Court, Thiruvalla alleging that he is insolvent and therefore he is not in a position to make the Cont. Case (C) No.613 of 2009 - 2 - payment. It is under the above circumstances that this contempt case has been filed by the petitioner. 3. Though notice was served on respondent No.1, he did not choose to appear and therefore, this Court had issued bailable warrant against him. Respondent No.1 is present today on execution of the bailable warrant. 4. Respondent No.1 submits that pending this case, the matter has been compromised between him and the petitioner and that he has already paid a sum of Rs.1,50,000/- to the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner also submits that payment has been made. Respondent No.1 further submits that so far as the balance amount payable by him is concerned, the parties have come to a settlement. This submission is also not opposed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. In the above facts and circumstances, we are of the view that this contempt case need not be continued for the time being and accordingly the contempt case is closed. However, we make it clear that it will be open to the petitioner to approach this Cont. Case (C) No.613 of 2009 - 3 - Court in case respondent No.1 commits any default in making the payment in terms of the present agreement alleged to have been entered into between him and the petitioner. 6. However, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and having regard to the harassment that the petitioner had to face at the hands of respondent No.1 which could have been avoided, we are of the view that respondent No.1 has to be mulcted with costs of Rupees five thousand to be paid to the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Respondent No.1 shall deposit Rupees five thousand before the registry of this Court within a period of four weeks from today in which event the said amount shall be disbursed to the petitioner. S.R.Bannurmath, Chief Justice A.K.Basheer, Judge vns