Krishnamoorthy vs Sudhakaran.V

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 03, 2023

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1393478

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/1393478
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran
Decided On: Jan 03, 2023
Case Number: Con.Case(C)/1982/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Krishnamoorthy

Respondent

Sudhakaran.V

Excerpt

.....21.11.2022, issued by the respondent, it is obvious that what she is attempting is an impossible task, because the contents of the order in question make very little sense.2. it is pertinent that even when this court had directedthe respondent to act in the manner as ordered in the judgment, he has now proceeded to issue proceedings, merely saying that the property in question has been acquired. no details are available from the order how this has been done and there is not even a whisper as regards the manner in which the directions in the judgment have been complied with.3. presumably being aware of the mind of this court asafore, the learned government pleader submitted that, if this court is not inclined to accept the new order of the respondent, then he may be given an opportunity of issuing a fresh one in terms of the directions in the judgment. :3:4. even though such an indulgence need not have beenshown to the respondent, i propose to accede to the afore request of the learned government pleader, because, at the end of the day, it is only if proper proceedings are issued, can the petitioner obtain any relief. resultantly, i close this contempt of court case, recording the submission of the learned government pleader that theorder of the respondent dated 21.11.2022 will stand withdrawnand that a new one will be issued, after re-hearing the petitioner in terms of the directions in the judgment, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. needless to say, i leave liberty to the petitioner toapproach this court after six weeks from today, if no new orderis received by him. i further record the submission of the learned government pleader that annexure 3 proceedings also stand withdrawn. sd/- devan ramachandran judge anm :4: appendix of con.case(c) 1982/2022 petitioner annexures annexure1 true copy of the order dated 12/1/2022 of the tahsildar (land records) annexure2 certified copy of the judgment dated this hon'ble.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 13TH POUSHA, 1944 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1982 OF 2022 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT WP(C) 7237/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN THE WRIT PETITION: KRISHNAMOORTHY AGED 68 YEARS S/O. LATE KANDAMUTHAN, BUILDING NO. 1, WARD NO. 8, ELAPPULLY PANCHAYAT, THAZHE POKKANTHODY, ELAPPULLI, PALAKKAD., PIN - 678622 BY ADV A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM) RESPONDENT/3RD RESPONDENT IN THE WRIT PETITION: SUDHAKARAN.V (FATHER'S NAME AND AGE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER), TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS), TALUK OFFICE, PALAKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678001 SMT.RESMI THOMAS - GP THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :2:
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
========================= Con.Case (C) No.1982 of 2022 ========================== Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2023

JUDGMENT

Though the learned Government Pleader - Smt.Resmi Thomas, tried her best to support the new order dated 21.11.2022, issued by the respondent, it is obvious that what she is attempting is an impossible task, because the contents of the order in question make very little sense.

2. It is pertinent that even when this Court had directed

the respondent to act in the manner as ordered in the judgment, he has now proceeded to issue proceedings, merely saying that the property in question has been acquired. No details are available from the order how this has been done and there is not even a whisper as regards the manner in which the directions in the judgment have been complied with.

3. Presumably being aware of the mind of this Court as

afore, the learned Government Pleader submitted that, if this Court is not inclined to accept the new order of the respondent, then he may be given an opportunity of issuing a fresh one in terms of the directions in the judgment. :3:

4. Even though such an indulgence need not have been

shown to the respondent, I propose to accede to the afore request of the learned Government Pleader, because, at the end of the day, it is only if proper proceedings are issued, can the petitioner obtain any relief. Resultantly, I close this Contempt of Court Case, recording the submission of the learned Government Pleader that the

order of the respondent dated 21.11.2022 will stand withdrawn

and that a new one will be issued, after re-hearing the petitioner in terms of the directions in the judgment, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say, I leave liberty to the petitioner to

approach this Court after six weeks from today, if no new order

is received by him. I further record the submission of the learned Government Pleader that Annexure 3 proceedings also stand withdrawn. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE anm :4: APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1982/2022 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 12/1/2022 OF THE TAHSILDAR (LAND RECORDS) Annexure2 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED THIS HON'BLE COURT Annexure3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO. TLKPKD/16420/2009-F4 DATED /8/2022 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT Annexure4 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED DATED

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2023 Same Parties Krishnamoorthy vs Sudhakaran.V Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Devan Ramachandran