Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52107

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
HARIS C. – Appellant
Versus
HARSHIL.R.MEENA – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 2435 OF 2025 | WP(C) NO.2771 OF 2024

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.N.KRISHNA RAJA MAULI, SMT.MINI.K.NAIR
For the Respondents: SMT.K.G.SAROJINI

The court ruled on the admissibility of remedies, affirming the petitioner's right to pursue further legal options despite closing the contempt case.

Headnote:In this contempt of court case, the petitioner challenged the order dated 18.10.2025 from the respondent, denying their application in Form-5, following directions from prior judgment (Annexure-A1). The court concluded that the contempt case is closed while preserving the petitioner's rights to seek further remedies. The final ruling permits the petitioner to invoke alternate remedies regarding the earlier order.

JUDGMENT

Today when the matter came up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader brought the attention of this Court to the order passed by the respondent on 18.10.2025 rejecting the application submitted by the petitioner in Form-5. This order was passed, on the direction issued by this Court in Annexure-A1 judgment.

In such circumstances, this contempt of court case is closed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to invoke his remedies against the said order.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52107

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., JHARIS C. – AppellantVersusHARSHIL.R.MEENA – RespondentCON.CASE(C) NO. 2435 OF 2025 | WP(C) NO.2771 OF 2024

The court ruled on the admissibility of remedies, affirming the petitioner's right to pursue further legal options despite closing the contempt case.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J
HARIS C. – Appellant
Versus
HARSHIL.R.MEENA – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 2435 OF 2025 | WP(C) NO.2771 OF 2024