Usha Jacob v. Nalini Netto

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/18TH BHADRA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 380 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).26775/2013 ----------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 26775/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 01.11.2013 PETITIONER/PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

--------------------------------- USHA JACOB, AGED 60 YEARS W/O. LATE C.JACOB, HOUSE NO. 29/30 A, S.A.ROAD COCHIN-19.

BY ADV. SRI.P.GEORGE VARGHESE RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

----------------------- NALINI NETTO W/O. NETTO, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HOME (C) DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695001.

R BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. R. PADMARAJ THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

CONT. CASE © NO. 380 OF 2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE A1 : TRUE COPY OF THE SAID JUDGMENT DATED 01.11.2013 IN W.P.(c) NO. 26775/2013 ANNEXURE A2 : A TRUE OFFICE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 01.11.2014 SENT BY THE PETITIONER THROUGH COUNSEL TO THE RESPONDENT UNDER REGISTERED POST WITH A/D ANNEXURE A3 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD SIGNED BY the RESPONDENT FOR HAVING RECEIVED ANN. A2 /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Cont. Case (C) No. 380 of 2015 against W.P.(C) No. 26775 of 2013 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 9th day of September, 2015

JUDGMENT

The learned Government Pleader submits that the direction given by this Court as per Annexure A1 judgment has been complied with by the respondent, passing appropriate orders on Ext. P8 representation.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the rent payable has been decreased and same stands detrimental to the rights and interests of the petitioner.

3. Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court finds that the direction given by this Court as per Annexure A1 to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P8 has been complied with by the respondent and as such, there is no contumacious act on the part of the said respondent.

In the said circumstances, the contempt matter stands closed, without prejudice to the rights and interest of the petitioner to

Cont. Case (C) No. 380 of 2015 against W.P.(C) No. 26775 of 2013 : 2 :

challenge the order stated as passed, if it stands detrimental to the rights and interest of the petitioner.

Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) kmd