Sibilmon Stephen v. Toby Thomas

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF MARCH 2015/22ND PHALGUNA, 1936 Con.Case(C).No. 176 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).29911/2013 ----------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 29911/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 12-03-2014 PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

------------------------------------------------ SIBILMON STEPHEN AGED 39 YEARS S/O.K.ESTHAPPAN, NEERATTUPARA HOUSE, VALLICHIRA P.O. MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT (REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER K.ESTHAPPAN, S/O.ESTHAPPAN KURIAN, NEERATTUPARA HOUSE VALLICHIRA P.O., MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT). BY ADVS.SRI.T.R.RAVI SRI.JAWAHAR JOSE SRI.V.VINAY MENON SMT.CISSY MATHEWS SRI.ARUN AJAY SHANKAR RESPONDENT)/1ST RESPONDENT:

------------------------------------------------ TOBY THOMAS AGE ABOUT 35 YEARS FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, SECRETARY PALA MUNICIPALITY, PALA P.O.

KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686575.

BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN, SC, PALA MUNICIPALITY THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Con.Case(C).No. 176 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).29911/2013 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURE:

ANNXURE-1 :

COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 12.03.2014 IN WPC NO.29911/2013 ANNEXURE-II :

COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 28.11.2014 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT ANNEXURE-III :

COPY OF LAWYER NOTICE DATED 09.01.2015 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER ANNEXURE-IV :

COPY OF POSTAL RECEIPT ISSUED FOR THE REGISTRATION OF ANNEXURE-III NOTICE ANNEXURE-V :

COPY OF POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT EVIDENCING THE RECEIPT OF ANNEXURE-III NOTICE RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: N I L //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE JV

C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.

------------------------------- Cont.Case(C) No.176 of 2015 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of March, 2015

JUDGMENT

This Contempt case has been filed alleging willful disobedience with the directions of this Court in the judgment dated 12.03.2014 in WPC 29911/2013. The respondent would submit that it is the failure on the part of the petitioner in the contempt petition/writ petition to produce the 'Fire No Objection Certificate' despite the initiation that disabled the respondent from complying with the directions. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Fire No Objection Certificate would be produced before the respondent. In such circumstances, it can only be said that there is no willful disobedience from the part of the respondent in complying with the directions. In the result, leaving liberty to the petitioner to produce the Fire No Objection Certificate before the respondent for the purpose of enabling him to comply with the directions, this Contempt Case is closed.

SD/- C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JV JUDGE