Disposed of a Contempt Case by closing the petition, cautioning the respondent to comply strictly with the law and a prior order regarding the service of notice, and deciding not to award costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions also stand closed.
Contempt Case closed without order as to costs; pending miscellaneous petitions closed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO CONTEMPT CASE No.2055 of 2022
ORDER:
The petitioner had approached this Court by way of W.P.No.3141 of 2022 with the complaint that the respondents therein were seeking to stop the construction of the building of the petitioner on the ground of certain complaints received by the official respondents.
07.03.2022 with the following directions:
“Paragraph No.7:- In these circumstances, to obviate
any further controversy or dispute, it would be appropriate to dispose of this Writ Petition with the following directions:
2
of the present Contempt Case on the ground that the 6th respondent has not served any notice on the petitioner till the filing of the present Contempt Case.
3
in accordance with the schedule set out in the order of this Court dated 07.03.2022. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, pending miscellaneous petitions, if
any, shall stand closed.
____________________________ R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO, J
21.07.2023 KPV
4
HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. RAGHUNANDAN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE No.2055 of 2022
21.07.2023
KPV
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the Contempt Case should be closed given that the notice was served on the petitioner's relative and counsel despite the initial failure to serve the petitioner personally.
Whether to caution the respondent to proceed strictly in accordance with the law and the previous court order.
Whether costs should be awarded in the present Contempt Case.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
3rd Respondent
6th Respondent
R. Raghunandan Rao
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
