V.P.Suresh Mohan v. Ramachandra Pisharadi

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 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2015/28TH KARTHIKA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 1721 of 2015 (S) IN WP(C).31011/2013 ------------------------------------------------------ IN PURSUANCE TO THE ORDER IN I.A.No.16849/2014 IN WP(C) No.31011/2013 DATED 3.2.2015 ------------------ PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN WP(C) :- -------------------------- V.P.SURESH MOHAN, AGED 43 YEARS, S/O.C.ACHUTHANKUTTY NAIR, VADAKKEPARAYIL, KIZHAKKUMPATTUKKARA DESOM, CHEMBUKKAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, TRISSUR DISTRICT.

BY ADV. SRI.ANCHAL C.VIJAYAN RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS 5 TO 8 IN WP(C) :- ----------------------------------------------

1. RAMACHANDRA PISHARADI, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) SECRETARY, PARAMEKKAVU DEVASWOM, SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR, PIN - 682 020.

2. K. MANOHARAN, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER) PRESIDENT, PARAMEKKAVU DEVASWOM, SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR, PIN - 682 020.

3. V.M.SASI, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER) VICE PRESIDENT, PARAMEKKAVU DEVASWOM, SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR, PIN - 682 020.

4. K. RAVEENDRANATH, (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THIS PETITIONER) ASSISTANT SECRETARY, PARAMEKKAVU DEVASWOM, SWARAJ ROUND, THRISSUR, PIN - 682 020.

BY SRI.P.VISWANATHAN THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-11-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J & A.M. SHAFFIQUE, J.

------------------------------------------- Cont. Case (C) No.1721 of 2015 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of November 2015

J U D G M E N T

Shaffique, J.

This contempt application has been filed alleging noncompliance of the directions issued by this Court in I.A.No.16849 of 2014 in W.P.(C) No.31011 of 2013. According to the petitioner, though there had been a direction to maintain status quo as regards the proposed construction of the school building, the respondents are proceeding for construction of the school. The petitioner relies upon Annexure B photographs to indicate that the construction activities are going on.

2.

Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the photographs only indicate that soil test is being done and no construction is being carried out.

Under such circumstances, we do not think that any willful contempt has been committed by the respondents. Accordingly, the contempt case is closed.

Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- A.M. SHAFFIQUE J UDGE //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Jvt/19.11.2015.