Dinesh Kumar G. P. v. Biswas Metha I.A.S. and Others

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 84909

KERALA HIGH COURT
*S. Manikumar, C. J., C. T. Ravikumar, J.
Dinesh Kumar G. P. v. Biswas Metha I.A.S. and Others

Table of Content
1. contempt petition filed alleges disobedience of an earlier court order. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner asserts timely filing of contempt petition despite delays. (Para 3 , 5)
3. court emphasizes compliance with statutory limitation for contempt. (Para 6 , 11)
4. court dismisses the petition on the grounds of being time-barred. (Para 12)

1. Alleging disobedience of the judgment made in W. P. (C) No. 6694 of 2007 dated 15/03/2007, instant Contempt petition (F. No. 51940 of 2019) is filed.

2. Material on record discloses that the Registry has raised a doubt as regards limitation. For brevity, note of the Registry is extracted hereunder:
“This Contempt of Court Case is filed by a Party in Person. Certain defects have been noted in this file. As per defect No.2, the Party in Person was requested to clarify why R3 and R4, who were not a party in the Writ Petition, are arrayed in the Cause title. As per Defect No.11, it was also requested to clarify as to whether the Contempt Case is time barred in view of the fact that the Writ Petition was disposed on 12/06/2007. All other defects have been cured.
To query No.2, the Party in Person has answered that R3 and R4 wilfully not compli