Kerala High Court
Con.Case(C)/413/2025 of N.P. BEEPATHU Vs ABBAS on 1 April 2025
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A. TUESDAY, THE 1 ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947 CON.CASE(C) NO. 413 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S: N.P. BEEPATHU,AGED 73 YEARS, W/O. KB MUHAMMEDKUTTY, KALATHIL HOUSE, NETTOOR DESOM, NETTOR P.O, MARADU VILLAGE,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
TUESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 11TH CHAITHRA, 1947
CON.CASE(C) NO. 413 OF 2025
PETITIONER/S:
N.P. BEEPATHU,AGED 73 YEARS,
W/O. KB MUHAMMEDKUTTY, KALATHIL HOUSE,
NETTOOR DESOM, NETTOR P.O,
MARADU VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
PIN - 682304
BY ADV SAIGI JACOB PALATTY
RESPONDENT/S:
ABBAS
AGE AND FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE AUTHORISED OFFICER UNDER THE PADDY LAND AND WET
LAND ACT DEPUTY COLLECTOR (RR), COLLECTRATE, KAKKANAD CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD P.O, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 682030
MEERA
AGE AND FATHER’S NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL
OFFICE, FORT KOCHI FORT KOCHI P.O, ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 682001
BY ADV ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
Smt.Amminikutty.K
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 01.04.2025, 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
This contempt of court case is submitted by the petitioner, alleging non-compliance of the directions issued by this Court. As per the judgment, this Court directed the respondent to pass orders on the application submitted by the petitioner as per Clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilization Order as directed by this Court in Ext.P7 judgment in W.P.(C) No. 34237 of 2024 . Now, an order has been passed by the respondent, wherein, it was found that the application of the petitioner was not the one submitted under Clause 6 of the KLU Order. According to the petitioner, the same amount to Contempt of this court.
2. As far as the judgment in respect of this Contempt of Court Case is filed is concerned, the same was disposed of taking note of Ext.P7 judgment in W.P.(C) No. 34237 of 2024 wherein, a direction was issued to the respondent herein to consider the application of the petitioner. However, there was no reference to Clause 6 of the KLU Order, in the said judgment. Therefore, there was no conclusion by this court that the application was the one filed under clause 6 of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Therefore, I am of the view that, as an order has been passed, in the light of the direction issued by this Court, the question of sustainability of the order is a matter which has to be agitated in a separate writ petition and I do not think that the same would fall within the scope of a Contempt of Court Case. In such circumstances, this Contempt of Court Case is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to invoke his remedies. Sd/- ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.
JUDGE rpk
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 413/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure 1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.34237/2024 DATED 17.12.2024 Annexure 2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED ALONG WITH THE JUDGMENT TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 09.01.2025