Disposed¶37

Kypa Maheswara Reddy v. Sreenivasulu Veldurthi

Andhra Pradesh HC19 Feb 2026CC/1200/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt of Courts Act 1971 Sections 10 to 12; willful disobedience of interim order; disconnection of power/electricity supply to bore well; Sy.Nos.489 and 491, Ac.2-17 cents, Chinthalapalle (Khajipeta) village, Midthur Mandal, Kurnool/Nandyala District; APSPDCL Deputy Executive Engineer and Assistant Engineer as contemnors; interim injunction I.A.No.1 of 2021 in S.A.No.443 of 2021 dated 15.09.2021; obstruction by third respondent threatening suicide; compliance effected; contempt case closed, no costs; W.P.No.41736 of 2022; single-judge order of Justice Battu Devanand dated 20.02.2026.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Case closed without initiating contempt proceedings or punishing the contemnors; no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, stand closed. ¶37

Kypa Maheswara Reddy Vs Sreenivasulu Veldurthi — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

¶1

APHC010082332023

¶2

[3207]

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

¶4

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

FRIDAY,THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶8

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1200/2023

¶9

Between:

¶10

KYPA MAHESWARA REDDY, S/O K.RAMI REDDY, HINDU, AGED 55 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KHAJIPETA VILLAGE, MIDTHUR MANDAL, NANDYALA DISTRICT,

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

SREENIVASULU VELDURTHI, DEPUTY EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, OPERATION, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P.LIMITED, NANDIKOTKUR, NANDYALA DISTRICT.

¶14

KRANTHI KUMAR, ASSISTANT ENGINEER, SOUTHERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P.LIMITED. RURAL SECTION, NANDIKOTKUR, NANDYALA DISTRICT.

¶15

KYPA NARAYANA REDDY, S/O NAGAIAHGARI BALI REDDY, HINDU, AGED 62 YEARS, AGRICULTURIST, R/O. KHAJIPETA VILLAGE, MIDTHUR MANDAL, NANDYALADISTRICT,

¶16

...CONTEMNOR(S):

¶17

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to initiate Contempt proceedings against the Respondents 1 to 3 herein for not taking steps to disconnect the power supply to the bore well situated in Survey Number 489, 491 an extent of Ac. 0-47, Ac. 1-05 and Ac. 0- 65 cents in total Ac. 2-17 cents situated in Chinthalapalle Village Revenue Limits (Khajipeta), Midthur Mandal, Kurnool District, now Nandyala District.,

¶18

¶19

pursuant to the Orders, of this Honorable Court dated 23-1-2023 passed in I.A.No. 1 of 2022 in W.P,No. 41736 of 2022 and to punish them in accordance with Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, and pass

¶20

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶21

1.BUDIGE RANGASWAMY

¶22

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶23

1.VENKATA RAMA RAO KOTA SC FOR APSPDCL

¶24

2.V R REDDY KOVVURI(SC FOR APSPDCL)

¶25

3.N CHANDRA SEKHAR REDDY

¶26

The Court made the following:

¶27

¶28

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶29

CONTEMPT CASE No.1200 of 2023

¶30

ORDER:

¶31

This Contempt Case has been filed complaining the willful disobedience of the respondents in implementing the order dated 23.01.2023 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.41736 of 2022.

¶32

At the stage of admission of the writ petition, this Court by order dated 23.01.2023, directed the respondent Nos.2 and 3 therein to disconnect the power supply to the bore well situated in Sy.Nos.489 and 491 to an extent of Ac.0-47 cents, Ac.1-05 cents and Ac.0-65 cents in total Ac.2-17 cents situated in Chinthalapalle Village Revenue Limits (Khajipeta), Midthur Mandal, Kurnool District, now Nandyala District, drawing the water by the respondent No.3 therein, as per the interim injunction order passed in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in S.A.No.443 of 2021, dated 15.09.2021 by this Court.

¶33

During the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.1 and 2 would submit that the order of the Court is complied with and the power is disconnected as directed by this Court on 23.01.2023 in W.P.No.41736 of 2022. Learned counsel further submits that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 could not comply with the order immediately after receipt of the Court’s order, for the reason that respondent No.3 obstructed them by threatening that he would commit suicide, when they went to disconnect the

¶34

¶35

power supply in compliance with the said order. Under those circumstances, they could not implement the order of the Court.

¶36

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as the order of the Court is already complied with as of now and considering the circumstances in which the respondent Nos.1 and 2 could not implement the order of the Court immediately, this Court is of the view that, there is no willful disobedience on the part of the respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶37