Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12985

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
P A MOHAMMED HAZEEM – Appellant
Versus
HONEY PEETHAMBARAN – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 274 OF 2026 | WP(C) NO.17543 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SMT.REHANA SHUKKUR, SRI.ARUN P. ANTONY
For the Respondents: GP SMT DEEPA V

Compliance with court judgments is essential to avoid contempt; this case was closed as directions were met.

Headnote:The court analyzed the compliance with its earlier directives issued in the judgment dated 12.09.2025. The report confirmed compliance, leading the court to determine that no further action was warranted regarding this contempt case. The court concluded that the contempt case should be closed as the earlier judgment had been complied with.

JUDGMENT

When this contempt case came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel submitted that the directions in the judgment dated 12.09.2025 is complied with.

If that is the case no further direction is necessary.

Therefore, this contempt case is closed.

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 :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 12985

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMP.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JP A MOHAMMED HAZEEM – AppellantVersusHONEY PEETHAMBARAN – RespondentCON.CASE(C) NO. 274 OF 2026 | WP(C) NO.17543 OF 2025

Compliance with court judgments is essential to avoid contempt; this case was closed as directions were met.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
P A MOHAMMED HAZEEM – Appellant
Versus
HONEY PEETHAMBARAN – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 274 OF 2026 | WP(C) NO.17543 OF 2025