Disposed¶34

Sri.K.Sai Kumar v. Sri.S.Suresh Kumar

Andhra Pradesh HC3 Feb 2026CC/1743/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

AP High Court Amaravati contempt case closed for compliance; Contempt of Courts Act 1971 Sections 10-12; disobedience of order dated 22.01.2025 in W.P.No.31079 of 2024 directing release of Rs.4,40,128/- within three months; payment made 23.09.2025 vide bill No.2025-1563270 per Finance Department letter dated 04.02.2026; underlying works under agreement No.78/022-23 dated 18.02.2023 (Venkatagiri Municipality solid waste management site); petitioner K. Sai Kumar; contemnors S. Suresh Kumar, G. Venkatarami Reddy, Peeyush Kumar; Justice V. Sujatha; decided 04.02.2026; no order as to costs.

What did the court decide?

No punitive relief; the Contempt Case was closed in view of the respondents' compliance with the order dated 22.01.2025, with no order as to costs; miscellaneous petitions, if any, stand closed. ¶34

Sri.K.Sai Kumar Vs Sri.S.Suresh Kumar — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

APHC010345262025

[3333]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE FOURTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶8

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1743/2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

SRI.K.SAI KUMAR, S/O.VENKATA RAMANAIAH, AGE- 45 YEARS , VENKATAGIRI, THIRUPATHI DISTRICT..

¶11

...PETITIONER

¶12

AND

¶13

SRI S SURESH KUMAR, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. - 522 503.

¶14

SRI G VENKATARAMI REDDY, VENKATAGIRI MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, REP.BY. COMMISSIONER ,THIRUPATHI, THIRUPATHI DISTRICT.

¶15

SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, FINANCE AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR. - 522 503.

¶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 may be pleased to punish the respondent herein for the willful, deliberate and wanton violation of the orders dt 22.1.2025 of this Honble Court made in WP. No.31079/2024 and pass

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner:

¶19

¶20

1.DEVASRI ROSHAN KANCHARLA

¶21

Counsel for the Contemnor(S):

¶22

1.GUDAPATI LAKSHMI NARAYANA

¶23

2.SREEKANTH REDDY AMBATI

¶24

The Court made the following:

¶25

¶26

ORDER :

¶27

This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for willful, wanton and deliberate disobedience in implementation of the order passed by this Court on 22.01.2025 in W.P.No.31079 of 2024.

¶28

The petitioner has filed the aforesaid writ petition aggrieved by the action of the respondents in withholding the payments of pending amounts of Rs.4,40,128/-, even after finalizing the bills payable to the petitioner in relation to the work 8Venkatagiri Municipality – internal roads electricity and basic amenities for the improvement of solid waste management site in dump yard of Venkatagiri Municipality vide agreement No.78/022-23, dated 18.02.2023. This Court, in W.P.No.31079 of 2024, passed the following order:

¶29

<…In view of the above instructions, since the bill amount claimed by the petitioner is an admitted bill, this Court feels it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to release amount of Rs.4,40,128/(Rupees Four lakhs forty thousand one hundred and twenty eight only) to the petitioner within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.=

¶30

Heard Sri. M. Srinu Babu, learned counsel on behalf of Sri. A. Srikanth Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶31

Though learned counsel for the petitioner obtained a Court slip with a request to post the matter under the caption 8for withdrawal9, there is no appearance on behalf of the petitioner. However, during the course of hearing, learned counsel appearing for the respondents has furnished a copy of the

¶32

¶33

letter dated 04.02.2026 addressed by the Principal Secretary to Government, Finance (FMU-EFS&T and MA&UD) Department, wherein it is mentioned that an amount of Rs.4,40,128/- was paid to the petitioner on 23.09.2025 vide bill No.2025-1563270 in compliance to the order passed by this Court.

¶34

In view of the fact that the orders passed by this Court on 22.01.2025 were complied with by the respondents, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.

¶36

___________________ JUSTICE V.SUJATHA

¶37

Date: 04.02.2026

¶38

Gss

Sri.K.Sai Kumar v. Sri.S.Suresh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri.K.Sai Kumar v. Sri.S.Suresh Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Apsrtc Vs Akula Sujatha

The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs Kamisetty Venkata Subbaiah

The Depot Manager Vs Sare Demudamma

the manager bajaj Vs Rettapalli Appalanarasa

The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs Shaik Huissain Bee

Randhi Apparao Vs Union of India