High Court of KeralaCon.Case(C)/1308/2015closed

Shiju V. Poulose v. Saji K. Alias

2015-10-21Honourable Mr.Justice K.Vinod Chandran3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/29TH ASWINA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 1308 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).11096/2015 ------------------------------------------------------ AGAINST THE ORDER IN WP(C) NO.11096/2015 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 31.07.2015 PETITIONER:

----------------- SHIJU V. PAOULOSE, AGED 46 YEARS VEEPANATH HOUSE, KARIMANKULAM, THIRUVANKULAM P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 305.

BY ADVS.SRI.P.SREEKUMAR SRI.S.PRASANTH SRI.SOORAJ T.ELENJICKAL SMT.UMA SRI.K.NANDAKUMAR SMT.P.M.MAZNA MANSOOR SMT.V.A.HARITHA RESPONDENTS:

----------------------

1. SAJI K. ALIAS AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER KUZHIKANDATHIL HOUSE, THIRUVANIYOOR P.O.

ERNAKULAM-682 308.

ADDL.2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER THIRUVANIYOOR VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

ADDL. R2 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DATED 10.09.2015 IN COC NO.1308 OF 2015.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE BY ADVS. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY SMT.K.K.JYOTHILAKSHMY SRI.SANIL JOSE THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Con.Case(C).No. 1308 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).11096/2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :- ----------------------------------- ANNEXURE A1 - COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 31.07.2015 IN WP(C) NO.11096 OF 2015.

ANNEXURE A2 - COPY OF FIR IN CRIME NO.970/15 OF PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL --------------------------------------- //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE sp

K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

--------------------------------------- C.O.C. No.1308 of 2015 In W.P.(C) No.11096 of 2015 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2015.

JUDGMENT

As per the direction of this Court, the Village Officer, Thiruvaniyoor has inspected the property, in which the contemnor/1st respondent is said to be carrying on the quarrying operations in violation of the interim order. It is categorically reported that no quarrying operations are carryied on in the premises.

In such circumstance, the contempt case is closed. Sd/- K. VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE //True Copy// P.A. to Judge.

Sp/21/10/15