SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 5793

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
FATHIMA ABDUL KHADAR – Appellant
Versus
RAJEENA S – Respondent
Contempt Case (C) No. 3119 of 2025 | W.P(C) No. 5768 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Smt. Farhana K.H., Shri Muhasin K.M.
For the Respondents: Sr GP Smt Vidya Kuriakose

Contempt may be resolved through compliance with procedural requirements such as fee payment.

Headnote:In the contempt proceedings regarding Form-6 application, the Government Pleader informed that fee notice has been issued, indicating no contempt. The court advises that upon fee payment, the Authorized Officer will process as directed, reinforcing that the petitioner may reopen contempt for further delay. The case concludes with this directive, ensuring procedural compliance.

JUDGMENT

When this Contempt Case came up for consideration, the learned Government Pleader submitted that fee notice is issued to the petitioner. If that is the case, there is no contempt in this case. If the petitioner pays the fee, the Authorized Officer will process the Form-6 application as directed by this Court. If there is any further delay, the petitioner can reopen the contempt.

With the above observation, the Contempt Case (C) is closed.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

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

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top