IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1931 Con.Case(C).No. 1265 of 2009(S) ------------------------------- [ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.C. NO.12561 OF 2003] PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT --------------- M.K.THANKAPPAN, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.M.R.KUTTAN, RESIDING AT MUTTATHIL VEEDU MURINGOOR, THEKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER --------------- DEEPESH S VED, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS SANTHIKUMAR G. VED, RESIDING AT BHAGAVAT APARTMENTS, PONKUNNAM PO, THRISSUR. ADV. SRI. M.P. ASOK KUMAR. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Cont. Case (C) No. 1265 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 18th November, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner alleges violation of Annexure 2 judgment. In Annexure 2 judgment, I directed as follows: “These original petitions have been filed by the management in two industrial disputes, namely, I.D.Nos. 83/2000 and 100/2000, challenging the common award passed by the Industrial Tribunal, Palakkad in those industrial disputes. Both the counsel for the management and the union submit that the issue involved in the award has been settled out of Court between the parties. Accordingly, these original petitions are closed recording the same and directing that the parties would be governed by that settlement in respect of the issues involved in the award.” The contention of the petitioner is that before this Court, the respondent had undertaken to pay the amount as agreed, which has not been paid. The respondent contends that a substantial part of the amount has already been paid and the balance could not be paid only because of financial difficulties. The respondent undertakes that the balance amount due as per the settlement would also be paid latest by 31-3-2010. The above undertaking is recorded and the contempt case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to restore the contempt case to file, if necessity arises. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.