Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
V.NANDANAN – Appellant
Versus
M PADMANABAN – Respondent
Cont.Case(C) No. 338 of 2026 | WP(C) No.6451 of 2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner alleges non-compliance of directions. (Para 1) |
| 2. court confirms compliance with earlier judgment. (Para 2) |
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this contempt case alleging non-compliance of the directions in the judgment dated 25.02.2025 in WP(C) No.6451 of 2021.
2. Today, when the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submits that based on the report of the Town Planner, the matter was considered and Annexure R1(d) proceedings have been initiated, wherein the petitioner was directed to demolish the unauthorised constructions made by him.
In view of the above directions, this Court is satisfied that the impugned judgment has been complied with. Accordingly, the contempt case stands closed, leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid proceedings in accordance with law, if so aggrieved.
Sd/-
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 :
Back to top
