Dismissed

Anil Kumar Mishra v. Ravi Ranjan, Managing Director U.P. State Agro Industrial Corporation Ltd.

Allahabad HC3 Dec 2025CAPL/4488/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt application over payment of admissible dues with interest following a writ court judgment. Counsel for respondent stated dues with interest were paid and the writ court's order complied with; applicant agreed the application had become infructuous. Court dismissed the contempt application as infructuous, discharging notices.

What the court decided

AI extract

Anil Kumar Mishra Vs Ravi Ranjan, Managing Director U.P… — Contempt of Court | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CONTEMPT APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. - 4488 of 2024

Anil Kumar Mishra

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

Ravi Ranjan, Managing Director U.P. State Agro Industrial Corporation Ltd.

¶7

.....Opposite Party(s)

¶8

Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Anurag Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: Rajeeva Kumar Sinha

¶9

Court No. - 8

¶10

HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR, J.

¶11

Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that all the admissible dues with interest/penal interest has been paid to the applicant and the judgment and order passed by the writ Court has been complied with.

¶12

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant has raised an objection regarding the determination of the amount paid as interest and after arguing at some length, he has submitted that the judgment and order passed by the writ court has been complied with and for all practical purposes, the present contempt application has become infructuous and the same may be dismissed as infructuous with liberty to the applicant if he is still aggrieved by the order passed by the respondent, he may be permitted to challenge the same by filing a writ petition.

¶13

In view of above, the present contempt application is dismissed as infructuous.

¶14

Notice, if any, stands discharged.

¶15

However, it is always open for the applicant to avail the remedy as may be permissible under the law.

¶16

December 3, 2025 Nitesh

¶17

(Manish Kumar,J.)

¶18

Digitally signed by :- NITESH KUMAR TEWARY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Anil Kumar Mishra v. Ravi Ranjan, Managing Director U.P. State Agro Industrial Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Anil Kumar Mishra v. Ravi Ranjan, Managing Director U.P. State Agro Industrial Corporation Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

M/S Skd City Projects Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Its Director Aseem Dubey and 2 Others Vs Sri Rajesh Kumar Yadav Chief Manager Authorized Officer Punjab National Bank Lko and Another

Triveni Prasad Vs Sri Laxmi Kant Shukla, the District Judge Sultanpur and 2 Others

Amit Shukla Vs Rakesh Kumar Distt.Inspector of Schools Unnao.

Santosh Kumar vs Somaru Pradhan, District Inspector of Schools, Siddharthanagar

Smt. Kirti Mandhyan @ Kirti Khatri vs Mr. Ravindra Kumar Mandar, District Magistrate/Collector Prayagraj

Rajendra Prajapati vs Sri Devendra Kumar Gupta Distt. Inspector of Schools Distt. Ballia and Another