Kerala High Court
Con.Case(C)/1023/2023 of HUSSAIN.A, Vs KRISHNATHEJA IAS on 16 September 2025
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 29TH BHADRA, 1945 CON.CASE(C) NO. 1023 OF 2023 [IN THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN WP(C) 25583/2021 DATED 13.01.2022 ON THE FILES OF HON’BLE HIGH COURT, ERNAKULAM] CONTEMPT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2023 / 29TH BHADRA, 1945
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1023 OF 2023
[IN THE JUDGMENT PASSED IN WP(C) 25583/2021 DATED 13.01.2022 ON
THE FILES OF HON’BLE HIGH COURT, ERNAKULAM]
CONTEMPT PETITIONER/FIRST PETITIONER:
HUSSAIN.A, AGED 75 YEARS,
SON OF AHAMMADUNNI @ AMMUNNI, SWASTHIKA HOUSE, (ALATHAYIL HOUSE - PULAKKA VEETTIL), AKALAD (VIA), MANNALAMKUNNU. P.O, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, TRISSUR DIST., PIN – 680518.
BY ADV P.B.PRADEEP
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT NO.4:
KRISHNATHEJA IAS,
AGE AND FATHER'S NAME ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOL.P.O, TRISSUR DIST., PIN – 680003.
SMT. VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 20.09.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
Even though the learned Government Pleader says that an order dated 25.08.2023 has been issued by the respondent in full compliance with the directions of this Court, it is seen therefrom that, though the amounts due to the petitioner have been deposited, it has been ordered not to be disbursed because they are awaiting certain clarifications from the Government of India.
2. The order now issued by the respondent also shows that the reason for afore is because the respondent has obtained certain information from the Government of India, that investigation into the property in question, under the provisions of the Enemy Property Act, is still going on.
3. I am afraid that the afore stand of the respondent cannot find favour in law because, they cannot wait ad infinitum for the Government of India to take action - which is either not completed, or perhaps not initiated. The order only records a suspicion that Government of India is carrying on an investigation; but without any affirmative information being available to them, or discernible therefrom. In the afore circumstances, I close this Contempt Case, directing the respondent to effect payment to the petitioner, on obtaining a self bond from him with respect to the said amount; with the clarification that, should the Government of India initiate any further action or complete proceedings under the afore Act, the petitioner will be solely responsible for the same and to answer it in terms of law. Needless to say, since this Court is not entering into the quantification of the amounts now made by the respondents, I leave liberty to the petitioner to invoke any remedy with respect to it, if he is so advised; for which purpose, all contentions in that regard are left open. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1023/2023 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE-A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 25583/ 2021 DATED: 13-01-2022 ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED: 01-02-22 ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST REMINDER DATED: 11-06-2022 ANNEXURE-A4 TRUE COPY OF THE SECOND REMINDER DATED: 03-08-2022 ANNEXURE-A5 TRUE COPY OF THE THIRD REMINDER DATED: 20-03-2022