IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Con Case(C) No. 786 of 2007(S)
1. E.SELVARAJAN, S/O. EBENEEZER,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. C.S.SREENIVASAN,
... Respondent
2. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, S/O. NARAYANAN NAIR,
3. SHYAMAN, S/O. APPUKUTTAN NAIR,
4. GOPAKUMAR, S/O. SUKUMARAN NAIR,
For Petitioner :SRI.G.SUDHEER
For Respondent :SRI.G.P.SHINOD
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :24/07/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
-------------------------------
C.C.C No. 786 OF 2007
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of July, 2007
JUDGMENT
There is no appearance for the respondents who have been
served with notice. But as fairly conceded by the learned counsel for
the petitioner that Annexure I judgment was served only on the
Secretary of the Panchayat and not on the President, the 2nd respondent
who though a party to Annexure I was not actually served with a copy of
the judgment. Even though there is enough material to hold that it was
with the knowledge and connivance of the 2nd respondent also that the
compound wall in question was demolished in violation of the directions
in Annexure I judgment, I refrain from initiating action under this
jurisdiction against the 2nd respondent on the technical reason that he
has not been served with notice of the judgment prior to the demolition.
However, I permit the petitioner to move the Tribunal which is presently
in seisin of the appeal preferred by the petitioner for appropriate
mandatory orders regarding restoration of the compound wall. The
Contempt Case will stand closed with the above direction. The
petitioner can seek appropriate orders from the Tribunal regarding
compensation also, if so advised.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
btt
WPC 2