Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Lalithambika Vs. N.Padmakumar

Lalithambika vs N.Padmakumar

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Oct 08, 2013
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1094758

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Lalithambika

Respondent

N.Padmakumar

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice thomas p.joseph tuesday, the8h day of october201316th aswina, 1935 con.case(c).no. 1206 of 2013 () ------------------------------- op(c) 513/2010 of high court of kerala petitioner/petitioner in wp(c): ------------------------------ lalithambika, aged59years lavanyayil, guruji road, vattiyoorkavu thiruvananthapuram from lalitha sadanathil memana muri, oachira village represented by her power of attorney sri.t.j.radhakrishnan, s/o.janardhana kurup, lavanyayil, guruji road, vattiyoorkavu, thiruvananthapuram-13. by adv. sri.k.a.salil narayanan respondent/alleged contemnor : ---------------------------- n.padmakumar (name and father's name not known to the petitioner) district collector, collectorate, alappuzha688001. by government pleader sri.sreejith this contempt of court case (civil) having come up for admission on0810-2013, the court on the same day delivered the following: bp con.case(c).no. 1206 of 2013 () appendix petitioner's annexures : annexure a1: copy of the judgment dt1907-2011 passed by this hon'ble court. respondent's annexures : nil. //true copy// p.a. to judge bp thomas p.joseph, j.========================= con. case no. 1206 of 2013 in o.p.(c) no. 513bof 2010. ============================ dated this the 8th day of october, 2013 judgment this contempt case is initiated by the first petitioner, in o.p.(c) no. 513 of 2010. it is complained that in spite of directions contained in annexure - a1, judgment dated 19.07.2011 in the said proceeding which directed the district collector, alappuzha to dispose of ext.p3 (in the original petition), revision challenging the re-survey as early as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment given to that authority and in spite of the first petitioner and others making available a copy of that judgment to the district collector immediately, that authority has not so far as disposed of the said rev

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE8H DAY OF OCTOBER201316TH ASWINA, 1935 Con.Case(C).No. 1206 of 2013 () ------------------------------- OP(C) 513/2010 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WP(C): ------------------------------ LALITHAMBIKA, AGED59YEARS LAVANYAYIL, GURUJI ROAD, VATTIYOORKAVU THIRUVANANTHAPURAM FROM LALITHA SADANATHIL MEMANA MURI, OACHIRA VILLAGE REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY SRI.T.J.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.JANARDHANA KURUP, LAVANYAYIL, GURUJI ROAD, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-13. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT/ALLEGED CONTEMNOR : ---------------------------- N.PADMAKUMAR (NAME AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA688001. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SREEJITH THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0810-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: BP Con.Case(C).No. 1206 of 2013 () APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES : ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT

DT1907-2011 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES : NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE BP THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

========================= Con. Case No. 1206 of 2013 in O.P.(C) No. 513bof 2010. ============================ Dated this the 8th day of October, 2013 JUDGMENT

This contempt case is initiated by the first petitioner, in O.P.(C) No. 513 of 2010. It is complained that in spite of directions contained in Annexure - A1, judgment dated 19.07.2011 in the said proceeding which directed the District Collector, Alappuzha to dispose of Ext.P3 (in the original petition), revision challenging the re-survey as early as possible, at any rate within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment given to that authority and in spite of the first petitioner and others making available a copy of that judgment to the District Collector immediately, that authority has not so far as disposed of the said revision.

2. Learned counsel submits that there is no justification in the District Collector not complying with the directions contained in the judgment referred above. Learned Government Pleader submits that there is no willful laches or delay on the part of the District Collector in complying with the directions contained in the judgment referred above. It is submitted that the District Collector COC No.1206 of 2013 2 had made attempt to dispose of the revision challenging re- survey at the earliest but the respondent in the original petition came up with several objections pertaining to the re-survey.

4. That, objections are preferred by the respondent or any other party to the proceeding to the revision challenging the re-survey is no ground for the District Collector not to dispose of the revision. If there is any obstruction from any of the party concerned, it is within the power of the District Collector to get necessary police assistance to ensure that his proceedings are completed without any such obstructions. The objections, if any preferred are also to be taken into account if it pertains to the disposal of the revision referred to in the judgment.

5. Learned Government Pleader has requested three months further time for the disposal of the revision.

6. Having regard to the circumstances stated by the learned Government Pleader, though there is no application requesting for extension of time, I am inclined to exercise the power to extend time in this contempt case itself. COC No.1206 of 2013 3 Resultantly, this contempt case is disposed of as under:- 1) The District Collector, Alappuzha is granted three months further time from this day to dispose of Ext.P3 (in the original petition) revision challenging re-survey, in accordance with the law. 2) Parties to the original petition shall co-operate with the District Collector for compliance with the above direction by producing the required materials as may be called for by that authority In the light of the above, the contempt proceeding is closed. Sd/- THOMAS P.JOSEPH, JUDGE //true copy// P.A. to Judge Smv COC No.1206 of 2013 4

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial