IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Con.Case(C).No. 602 of 2010(S)
1. R.PRAKSSH KUMAR AGED 43 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SRI. ROY JACOB (FATHERS NAME AND AGE NOT
... Respondent
2. SRI. JOHNY MATHEW (FATHERS NAME AND
3. SRI. SASEENDRAN (FATHERS NAME AND
4. SRI. GOVINDAN(FATHERS NAME AND
5. SRI. ANTONY SEBASTIAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.SOORANAD S.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.J.CHELAMESWAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN
Dated :03/06/2010
O R D E R
J.Chelameswar, CJ. & P.N.Ravindran, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Contempt Case(Civil) No. 602 OF 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2010
JUDGMENT
J.Chelameswar, CJ.
By judgment dated 03.04.2009 in WP(C) No.6540 of
2009, this Court recorded an undertaking given by the 1st
respondent therein that the construction work of
Munsiff-Magistrate Court building at Sasthancotta in Kollam
District would be completed on or before 25.10.2009. The
further factual backgrounds are not necessary for the present
purpose.
2. Contending that such an undertaking before this Court
has not yet been complied with, the writ petitioner filed this
Contempt Case. During the pendency of this contempt case,
I.A. No.7011 of 2010 for extension of time and C.M. Appl.
No.2225 of 2010 for condonation of delay in filing the
extension application have been filed by the 1st respondent in
the writ petition.
3. The learned Government Pleader submitted that for
the various reasons mentioned in the affidavit filed in support
COC No.602 of 2010
-:2:-
of IA No.7011 of 2010, the undertaking given before this Court to
complete the construction work of the abovementioned court
building could not be completed and prays that the time
stipulated for the completion of the work be extended as prayed
for. We have perused the belated application for extension of
time and we also perused the application seeking condonation of
delay. Having regard to the circumstances we deem it
appropriate to condone the delay in filing the application for
extension of time. We are also of the opinion that having regard
to the reasons given by the respondents, the time stipulated for
completing the construction work be extended as prayed for.
In view of the abovementioned orders, there is no need to
proceed further with this Contempt Case. Hence the Contempt
Case is closed.
J.Chelameswar,
Chief Justice.
P.N.Ravindran,
Judge.
ttb
COC No.602 of 2010
-:3:-