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.

Rappai vs Lathika

Rappai vs Lathika

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 31, 2021
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1621110

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
Case Number
Con.Case(C)/593/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rappai

Respondent

Lathika

Excerpt

.....the court on the same day delivered the following:judgmentthe petitioner has approached this courtalleging that the directions in the judgmentdated 23.10.2019 in w.p(c)no.27909 of 2019 have not been complied with.2. however, the learned seniorgovernment pleader - shri.mathew george vadakkel, submitted that the judgment has been fully complied with and that an order, dated 11.03.2020, has been issued by the respondent - a copy of which has been filed on record along with a memo dated 16.03.2020.3. when i examine the order now placedon record by the learned senior government pleader, it is evident that the petitioner's request appears to have been rejected on its merits. obviously, therefore, the petitionerwill have to challenge the said orderappositely; and no further proceedings in this case can be taken forward. in the afore circumstances, this contempt case is closed; however, leaving liberty to the petitioner to challenge theorder now placed on record by the learnedsenior government pleader appropriately, as he may be advised. sd/- devan ramachandran judge mc/13.4.2021 appendix petitioner's/s exhibits: annexure i true copy of form no.9 application dated 24.09.2019 submitted before the respondent. annexure ii certified copy of the judgment in wp(c) no.27909/2019 dated 23.10.2019. annexure iii the copy of the receipt issued by office of the revenue divisional officer dated 12.11.2019.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 10TH CHAITHRA, 1943 Con.Case(C).No.593 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 27909/2019 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 27909/2019(K) OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

PETITIONER: RAPPAI AGED 75 YEARS S/O.THOMAS, PLASSERY HOUSE, KORATTY EAST P O, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT: LATHIKA AGE OF THE RESPONDENT AND FATHER'S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680121. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKKEL-SR.GP THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

alleging that the directions in the judgment

dated 23.10.2019 in W.P(C)No.27909 of 2019 have not been complied with.

2. However, the learned Senior

Government Pleader - Shri.Mathew George Vadakkel, submitted that the judgment has been fully complied with and that an order, dated 11.03.2020, has been issued by the respondent - a copy of which has been filed on record along with a memo dated 16.03.2020.

3. When I examine the order now placed

on record by the learned Senior Government Pleader, it is evident that the petitioner's request appears to have been rejected on its merits. Obviously, therefore, the petitioner

will have to challenge the said order

appositely; and no further proceedings in this case can be taken forward. In the afore circumstances, this contempt case is closed; however, leaving liberty to the petitioner to challenge the

order now placed on record by the learned

Senior Government Pleader appropriately, as he may be advised. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/13.4.2021 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE I TRUE COPY OF FORM NO.9 APPLICATION DATED 24.09.2019 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE II CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.27909/2019 DATED 23.10.2019. ANNEXURE III THE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER DATED 12.11.2019.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial