Antony Davis vs Renu Raj

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 30, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1334501

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1334501
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Nias C.P.
Decided On: Jun 30, 2023
Case Number: Con.Case(C)/194/2023

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Antony Davis

Respondent

Renu Raj

Excerpt

.....this court passed the following order on 17.03.2023 :- “on behalf of the government, a memo is filed producing theorder passed in purported compliance of the judgment of this court.the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the documents which were produced in the writ petition which is mentioned in thejudgment has not been considered by the respondent while passingthe fresh order.2. the learned government pleader is directed to getinstructions on the same. needless to say that if the documents referred to in the judgment are not considered as directed, the respondent has not complied with the judgment. if that is so, the respondent will ensure compliance of the order by passing orders in compliance with the directions given in the judgment. post on 4.4.2023. “thereafter, a fresh order is passed on 8.5.2023 referring to the documents directed to be considered. accordingly, the contempt of court case (civil) is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the order dated 8.5.2023, if so advised. sd/-mohammed nias c.p., judge dlk/30.6.2023 appendix of con.case(c) 194/2023 petitioner's annexures annexure a1 the certified copy of the judgment of this hon'ble court in w.p.(c) no. 3564/2017 dated 28.10.2022 annexure a2 the copy of annexure a1 sealed by the cochin metro rail project dated 04.11.2022 annexure a3 the copy of the request letter submitted by the petitioner before the office of the 3rd annexure a4 the original acknowledgment receipt received by the petitioner from the office of the 3rd

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 9TH ASHADHA, 1945 CON.CASE(C) NO. 194 OF 2023 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 3564/2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER: ANTONY DAVIS AGED 59 YEARS S/O. DASIUS, THOTTAKATHU HOUSE, CHERANALLOR, KOCHI-34, PIN - 682034 BY ADVS. K.R.VINOD M.S.LETHA NABIL KHADER CHITHRA C.EDADAN DEVIKA PRASAD RESPONDENT: RENU RAJ (AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 682020, PIN - 682020 OTHER PRESENT: BY SR GP SMT.VINITHA B THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MOHAMMED NIAS. C.P.,J ------------ Cont. of Court Case (Civil) No.194 of 2023 ------------------ Dated this the 30th day of June, 2023

JUDGMENT

This contempt of court case (Civil) is filed alleging non-compliance with the judgment dated 28.10.2022 in WP(C)No. 3564 of 2017. Earlier an

order was passed on 28.1.2023 without reference to the directions of this

Court, which directed specific consideration to the documents mentioned in the judgment dated 28.10.2022. Accordingly, this Court passed the following order on 17.03.2023 :- “On behalf of the Government, a memo is filed producing the

order passed in purported compliance of the judgment of this Court.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the documents which were produced in the writ petition which is mentioned in the

judgment has not been considered by the respondent while passing

the fresh order.

2. The learned Government Pleader is directed to get

instructions on the same. Needless to say that if the documents referred to in the judgment are not considered as directed, the respondent has not complied with the judgment. If that is so, the respondent will ensure compliance of the order by passing orders in compliance with the directions given in the judgment. Post on 4.4.2023. “

Thereafter, a fresh order is passed on 8.5.2023 referring to the documents directed to be considered. Accordingly, the contempt of court case (civil) is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the order dated 8.5.2023, if so advised. Sd/-MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE dlk/30.6.2023 APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 194/2023 PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES Annexure A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.(C) NO. 3564/2017 DATED 28.10.2022 Annexure A2 THE COPY OF ANNEXURE A1 SEALED BY THE COCHIN METRO RAIL PROJECT DATED 04.11.2022 Annexure A3 THE COPY OF THE REQUEST LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD Annexure A4 THE ORIGINAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Antony Davis vs Renu Raj Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Nias C.P.

Government pleader contempt of court Without prejudice Certified copy On behalf of Received by high court