Molla Kanakaratnam Vs Katta Simhachalam, IAS — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

Molla Kanakaratnam Vs Katta Simhachalam, IAS — Contempt of Court | Andhra Pradesh HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Contempt Case No. 653 of 2025 closed; personal presence of the sole respondent dispensed with until further orders; petitioner granted liberty to initiate separate proceedings for any further claim, if any; miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case to stand closed; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent committed willful disobedience of the orders dated 04.10.2023 passed in W.P.No.25724 of 2023 warranting action under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. +1 more

Court's answer

Upon the sole respondent's personal appearance, his plea that his non-appearance on 09.12.2025 was neither willful nor wanton, and his unconditional apology, the Court dispensed with his personal presence until further orders.

Ratio / Principle

Recording the submissions that the orders of the Court are complied with (reiterated by counsel for the respondents and not refuted by counsel for the petitioner), the Court closed the Contempt Case, granting the petitioner liberty to initiate separate proceedings for any further claim, with no order as to costs. The Court made no express finding of willful contempt.

Key takeaways

Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Sections 10 to 12 — civil contempt — alleged willful disobedience of High Court orders dated 04.10.2023 in W.P.No.25724 of 2023 — sole respondent (Project Officer, ITDA Rampachodavaram) failed to appear despite notice, notice in Form-I issued vide docket order dated 09.12.2025 — respondent thereafter appeared in person, pleaded that his earlier non-appearance was neither willful nor wanton, tendered unconditional apology and stated that the writ orders stood complied with — submission reiterated by his counsel and not refuted by petitioner's counsel — Court dispensed with the respondent's personal presence until further orders, closed the Contempt Case granting the petitioner liberty to initiate separate proceedings for any further claim, and ordered miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the case to stand closed — no order as to costs.

[3329]

APHC010098572025

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI

(Special Original Jurisdiction)

MONDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX

PRESENT

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 653/2025

Between:

MOLLA KANAKARATNAM, D/O. BALARAJU, AGE 43 YEARS, OCC UNEMPLOYEE, R/O. DAKODU VILLAGE AND POST, ADDATEEGALA MANDAL, ASR DISTRICT, (PREVIOUSLY EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT).

...PETITIONER

AND

KATTA SIMHACHALAM IAS, Project Officer, ITDA Rampachodavaram, A.S.R. District.

...CONTEMNOR

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 pleased to summon the respondents and punish them under Sections-10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, for willfully and deliberately violating the orders of this Hon'ble Court dated 04.10.2023 passed in W.P. No. 25724 of 2023, and pass

IA NO: 1 OF 2026

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased May be pleased to discharge this Respondent from the array of the respondents in the CC.No.653 of 2025 and close the contempt case against this Respondent and pass

Counsel for the Petitioner:

1.T S N SUDHAKAR

Counsel for the Contemnor:

1.NAGARAJU PULLAGURA

The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

CONTEMPT CASE NO:653 OF 2025

ORDER:

This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 04.10.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.25724 of 2023.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is observed from the docket order that this Court vide order dated 09.12.2025 issued notice in Form-I to the sole respondent on the ground that he neither appeared in person nor represented through counsel even after receipt of notice. Pursuant to the said order, the respondent appeared in person before this Court today and pleaded that his non appearance on 09.12.2025 is neither willful nor wanton and rendered his unconditional apology. He further pleaded that the orders dated 04.10.2023 passed by this Court in W.P.No.25274 of 2023 are complied with. Considering the said pleading, the presence of the sole respondent is hereby dispensed with until further orders.

Learned counsel for the respondents also reiterated the submission made by the sole respondent that the orders of this Court are complied with and hence, no further orders are required to be passed in the present contempt case.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner did not refute the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents.

Recording the said submission, the Contempt Case is closed, granting liberty to the petitioner for initiating separate proceedings for further claim, if any. No order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed.

________________________________ VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA, J

05.01.2026 BSP

69

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENKATESWARLU NIMMAGADDA

(closed)

Contempt Case No.653 of 2025

05.01.2026 BSP