IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, MURALEE KRISHNA S., JJ
SABI ENGINEERING COMPANY – Appellant
Versus
MOHAMMAD SHAFIQ – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. basis of contempt appeal filed. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court’s observation on maintainability. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. determining conditions for appealability. (Para 5) |
Anil K. Narendran, J.
This contempt appeal filed under Section 19 (1) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 , arises out of the judgment dated 06.11.2025 of the learned Single Judge in Con. Case(C)No.456 of 2025, which was one filed by the appellant-petitioner alleging willful disobedience of the directions contained in the order of the learned Single Judge dated 03.10.2024 in W.P.(C)No.22499 of 2024. By the impugned judgment dated 06.11.2025, the learned Single Judge closed the contempt proceedings, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to agitate the matter in the pending writ petition. Paragraphs 2 to 4 and also the last paragraph of that judgment read thus;
“2. Even though the respondents sought sanction from the Government as per Annex.B, the same was rejected. Subsequently, yet another communication was issued by the respondents, as evidenced by Annex.A1 dated 25.08.2025. Today, the learned standing counsel for the respondents submits that, the said request is also rejected. 3. The learned counsel f
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.