Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 13897

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
PRASEETHA V. P – Appellant
Versus
MS. JAYASREE S WARRIER – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 366 OF 2026 | WP(C) NO.32341 OF 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.DHEERAJ KRISHNAN PEROT, SMT.FIDHA NAVAS, SMT.ARCHITA BAIJU PANICKER, SMT.LIBA L. BENSER
For the Respondents: GP SMT DEEPA V

Compliance with court directives negates the need for further orders in contempt proceedings.

Headnote:This judgment pertains to the compliance of directives from WP

(C) No. 32341 of 2025, where the court acknowledged the Government Pleader's submission of full compliance with directions. Consequently, the contempt case was ordered closed. No further directives were deemed necessary due to compliance.

JUDGMENT

Today, when the matter came up for consideration, the Government Pleader submitted that the directions in the judgment dated 27.10.2025 in WP (C) No.32341 of 2025 have already been complied. If that is the case, no further direction is necessary.

Recording the submission of the Government Pleader, this Contempt Case (C) 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) 13897

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMP.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JPRASEETHA V. P – AppellantVersusMS. JAYASREE S WARRIER – RespondentCON.CASE(C) NO. 366 OF 2026 | WP(C) NO.32341 OF 2025

Compliance with court directives negates the need for further orders in contempt proceedings.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
PRASEETHA V. P – Appellant
Versus
MS. JAYASREE S WARRIER – Respondent
CON.CASE(C) NO. 366 OF 2026 | WP(C) NO.32341 OF 2025