P.Bharghavan v. Dr.S.Bindu

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI TUESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/13TH SRAVANA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 934 of 2015 (S) ----------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.27513 OF 2012 DATED 29-01-2015 --------------------- PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C) :

----------------------------------------------------------- P.BHARGHAVAN, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.LATE PACHAN, THANICKAL HOUSE, MUTTAM P.O., THODUPUZHA- 685 587 BY ADVS.SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR SRI.IYPE JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT W.P.(C) :

-------------------------------------------------------------------- DR.S.BINDU, AGE & FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE DIRECTOR, KIRTADS, GOLF LINK ROAD, CHEVAYUR, KOZHIKODE, KERALA- 673 017.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.LALY VINCENT THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Msd.

Con.Case(C).No. 934 of 2015 (S) ----------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE A1:

CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 29.01.2015 IN W.P.(C).NO.27513 OF 2012 OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA.

ANNEXURE A2:

TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER DATED 20.02.2015 ISSUED TO THE RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE A3:

TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 15.06.2015 ALONG WITH ADDRESSES RECEIPT ISSUED BY DEPARTMENT OF POSTS INDIA, ERNAKULAM HIGH COURT POST OFFICE. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE I:

TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 27.11.2012.

ANNEXURE II:

TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.01.2013.

ANNEXURE III:

TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 06.03.2013.

ANNEXURE IV:

TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE ENTRANCE COMMISSIONER.

ANNEXURE V:

TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VIGILANCE OFFICER. //TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- Cont. Case (C) No. 934 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of August, 2015

J U D G M E N T

As there is substantial compliance, the contempt case is closed reserving the right of the petitioner to challenge the present order if he is really aggrieved, through appropriate proceedings as envisaged under law. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-