Saneesh E.S. v. Veena Madhavan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF AUGUST 2015/20TH SRAVANA, 1937 Con.Case(C).No. 1030 of 2013 (S) IN WP(C).21143/2012 ------------------------------------------------------ IN WP(C) 21143/2012 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 18-09-2012 ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S):

-------------------------- SANEESH E.S. AGED 25 YEARS S/O.SOURY.K.M., EDAKKTTUVELLIL HOUSE PERIKKALLOOR P.O., PULPALLY VILLAGE SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK, WAYANAD DISTRICT-673579. BY ADVS.SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.E.C.BINEESH RESPONDENT(S):

---------------------------- VEENA MADHAVAN (AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE REVENUE DIVISIONL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE RDO MANANTHAVADI, WAYANAD.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MOHEMMAD SAVAD THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

Con.Case(C).No. 1030 of 2013 (S) IN WP(C).21143/2012 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURE :

------------------------------------------- ANNEXURE A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN WPC.NO.21143/2012 DATED 18.09.2012 ANNEXURE A2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT, IN COMPLIANCE OF THE SAID DIRECTION IN ANNEXURE A1 ANNEXURE A2(a) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT, EVIDENCING DISPATCH OF ANNEXURE A2.

ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REGISTERED SHOW CAUSE NOTICE PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE A3(a) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT EVIDENCING DISPATCH OF ANNEXURE A3 ANNEXURE A3(b) A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPT OF ANNEXURE A3 ON 20.07.2013. RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURE :

NIL --------------------------------------------- /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE VS

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

--------------------------------------------------- Con.Case.No.1030 of 2013 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of August, 2015

JUDGMENT

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the directions have been complied with by issuing an order and aggrieved by the same the petitioner has filed a fresh writ petition also.

In that view of the matter, no further action is required and accordingly the contempt case is closed. Sd/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE vs