IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J
DR. ABDUL JABBAR K.E – Appellant
Versus
SHAMIN SEBASTIAN COMPETENT AUTHORITY AND SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 2604 OF 2025
ORDER This case has been posted today in the defect. The defect noted is to the effect that the instant contempt case is filed beyond limitation period of one year. But the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the judgment, in respect of which non-compliance is alleged, was passed on 30.06.2023. It was pointed out that no time limit was fixed for complying with the direction in this judgment. However, the date fixed for appearance before the competent Authority was on 05.07.2023. Two months period in terms of Rule 21 of the Writ Rules expired on 05.09.2023. Accordingly, the Contempt Case ought to have been filed before 05.09.2024.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has sufficient cause to condone the delay in filing the Contempt Case on 23.10.2025. This Court is afraid whether the contention raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner can be entertained. There is no mechanism for condonation of delay, in so far as the period stipulated for filing contempt of cases are concerned. On the expiry of the one year period, a contempt case cannot be filed, it is the settled position.
In the absence of any provision for condonation of delay, this Court finds that the objection raised by the Registry is maintainable. Accordingly, the objection is sustained. This will not, however, preclude the petitioner’s right to institute a fresh Writ Petition on the cause of action alleged herein, in case such a Writ Petition is otherwise maintainable.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.