S.Palavesum v. Sri.Jeevandas Narayan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2015/25TH ASHADHA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 897 of 2015 (S) IN WA.937/2014 ------------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WA 937/2014 DATED 17-09-2014 ..................
PETITIONER/7TH RESPONDENT :
------------------------------------- S.PALAVESUM AGED 53 YEARS S/O.SUNDARAN PILLAI, NO 7/3 AMUTHAM NAGAR EDAYAR PALAYAM, COIMBATORE 641025 BY ADVS.SRI.GEORGE CHERIAN (SR.) SMT.K.S.SANTHI SMT.LATHA SUSAN CHERIAN RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS :
-----------------------------------
1. SRI.JEEVANDAS NARAYAN MANAGING DIRECTOR, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE HEAD OFFICETHIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695001
2. SRI A N KRISHNAN GENERAL MANAGER, STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, HEAD OFFICE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN 695001 BY SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN, STANDING COUNSEL, SBT THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-07-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Con.Case(C).No. 897 of 2015 (S) IN WA.937/2014 --------------------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
ANNEXURE A1 : TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.09.14 IN W.A. No.937/14.
ANNEXURE A2 : TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 04.05.15 BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT.
ANNEXURE A3 : TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 18.05.15 BY THE PETITIONER TO RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :
NIL /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE
ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J. & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Contempt Case (Civil) No. 897 OF 2015 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16th day of July, 2015
JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
This contempt case has been filed alleging non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.(C) No.26563 of 2012 which is confirmed by this Court in W.A. No.937 of 2014 dated 17.09.2014.
2. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the amount payable to the complainant has already been received. But the judgment relates to certain other persons to whom the amount is yet to be paid.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent however would submit that the Bank has taken steps to process the claim of other six persons also and two persons had not responded to their queries.
Contempt Case (Civil) No. 897 of 2015 -:2:- Under such circumstances, we do not think that there is any necessity to keep the contempt case pending. Accordingly, the same is closed.
Ashok Bhushan, Chief Justice.
A.M. Shaffique, Judge.
ttb/16/07