Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LISY SIMON versus SRI.SYED MOHAMMED

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


LISY SIMON v. SRI.SYED MOHAMMED - Con Case(C) No. 1195 of 2006(S) [2007] RD-KL 11266 (26 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Con Case(C) No. 1195 of 2006(S)

1. LISY SIMON,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. SRI.SYED MOHAMMED,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.I.DINESH MENON

For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :26/06/2007

O R D E R

H.L.Dattu,C.J. & K.T.Sankaran,J.

Cont. Case (C).No.1195 of 2006-S

Dated, this the 26th day of June, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.Dattu,C.J. The petitioner was before this Court in W.P.(C).No.23146 of 2005 seeking certain directions to the respondent in the writ petition. This Court by order dated 15.10.2005 was pleased to dispose of the writ petition by issuing the following directions:

"I heard the learned Government Pleader also. In view of the recent Division Bench decision of this Court in OP.No.12774/97 and connected cases, Circular 3/97 no longer remains in force. Accordingly, the Secretary, RTA, Malappuram is directed to issue the permit granted as per Ext.P2, after settling the time schedule within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the Secretary will be free to fix the running time, having regard to the nature of the route and also the views of the petitioner".

2. Alleging that the respondent has not complied with the orders and directions issued by this Court in the aforesaid writ petition, the present contempt petition has been filed by the petitioner before this Court.

3. After service of notice, the respondent has entered his appearance and has filed his detailed affidavit and along with that he has produced the proceedings of the Regional Transport Authority, Malappuram dated 30.01.2006. Cont.Case (C).No.1195 of 2006-S

4. Having gone through the orders passed by the learned Single Judge and the pleadings in the contempt petition and also the proceedings of the R.T.A., Malappuram dated 30.1.2006, we are of the firm opinion that the respondent has substantially complied with the orders and directions issued by this Court. Therefore, the contempt petition need not be proceeded further. Accordingly, the contempt proceedings requires to be dropped and it is dropped.

5. Liberty is reserved to the petitioner, if she so desires, to question the correctness or otherwise of the proceedings of the R.T.A., Malappuram dated 30.1.2006 before the appropriate forum in appropriate proceedings. Ordered accordingly. H.L.Dattu Chief Justice K.T.Sankaran Judge vku/-


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.