Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 25865
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
T.R. RAVI, J
SUNIL RAMAN NAIR – Appellant
Versus
PRASANTH N – Respondent
Con.Case(C) No.1109 of 2025|OP(C) No.933 of 2025
Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN, SRI.SABU GEORGE, SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER, SMT.MEERA P.
For the Respondents: SRI.LINDONS C.DAVIS, SMT.E.U.DHANYA, SMT.CHINJU P. JOYIES, SHRI.VINAYAK MANOHARAN P.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN, SRI.SABU GEORGE, SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER, SMT.MEERA P.
For the Respondents: SRI.LINDONS C.DAVIS, SMT.E.U.DHANYA, SMT.CHINJU P. JOYIES, SHRI.VINAYAK MANOHARAN P.
Dismissal of underlying petition renders contempt proceedings moot and unnecessary.
Headnote:The contempt petition alleges non-compliance with an interim order dated 03.04.2025 in OP
(C) No.933 of 2025, directing maintenance of status quo for three months. Essential facts include alleged continuation of construction despite the order, supported by photographs and communications. The court finds no necessity to examine allegations as the original petition has been dismissed. The primary issue is whether contempt proceedings should continue post-dismissal of the underlying original petition. The court's reasoning is that dismissal of the original petition on 30.03.2026 renders contempt allegations moot, obviating further inquiry. The contempt case fails and is dismissed.
JUDGMENT
The contempt petition has been filed alleging non- compliance with the order dated 03.04.2025 issued by this Court in OP(C) No.933 of 2025, directing to maintain status quo for a period of three months. Since the original petition itself has been dismissed by judgment even dated 30.03.2026, there is no necessity to go into the allegations in this contempt case.
The contempt case fails and the same is dismissed.
