Disposed

Akanchha Traders v. Shri Sarveshwar Bhure

Chhattisgarh HC4 Jul 2023CONT/431/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in Bilaspur closed a contempt petition and disposed of all interlocutory applications. Noting that the petition was filed against additional departments not arrayed as respondents and that the disputed amount had already been released by the Collector, the court found no ground to continue the contempt proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petition closed; Notice discharged; All IAs disposed of.

Akanchha Traders Vs Shri Sarveshwar Bhure — Contempt of Court | Chhattisgarh HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

CONT No. 431 of 2023

¶5

Akanchha Traders Through Proprietor Satish Kumar Sharma, S/o Shri Radhika Prasad Sharma, Aged About 50 Years R/o Shop No. 3, Indrawati Colony, Raipur, Tahsil And District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶6

---- Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

Shri Sarveshwar Bhure Collector, Collectorate Building, G.E.Road, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh

¶9

---- Respondent

¶10

______________________________________________________________ For Petitioner : Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Mr. Pankaj Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent : Mr. Rahul Jha, Advocate

¶11

S.B.: Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, Judge

¶12

Order On Board

¶13

04/07/2023

¶14

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that entire undisputed amount has been paid by the Collector.

¶15

This submission of learned counsel for the respondent is not disputed by learned counsel for the petitioner. However, they say that the payment has not been made by the other department and, therefore, they have filed an application for impleading the other officers of the department.

¶16

Perused the order in the contempt petition, as also the pleadings in writ petition.

¶17

Perusal of the writ petition would show that the writ petition is filed only against the State of Chhattisgarh through Secretary, General Administration Department and the Collector. Other departments have not been arrayed as party respondents. Order

¶18

¶19

dated 16.02.2023 passed in the writ petition would show that the Court issued direction to respondent to release the undisputed amount. On the date of issuance of direction vide order dated 16.02.2023 passed in writ petition, only two respondents were arrayed and in view of undisputed submission of learned counsel for the parties that the Collector has already released the undisputed amount, I do not find any good ground to continue with the contempt petition.

¶20

Contempt petition is accordingly closed. Notice issued to respondent stands discharged.

¶21

All IAs. also stand disposed of.

¶22

Sd/-/-/-/-/--------/--/-

¶23

(Parth Prateem Sahu)

¶24

Judge

¶25

Praveen

Akanchha Traders v. Shri Sarveshwar Bhure

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akanchha Traders v. Shri Sarveshwar Bhure

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Lallan Singh Vs Dr. Kamal Preet Singh

M/S Sagar Industries Vs Neelam Namdev Ekka

Krishna Kumar Yadu Vs R. P. Verma

Govind Prasad Dewangan Vs Alok Shukla

Sachchidanand Dwivedi Vs Ashutosh Chaturvedi

M/S M. K. Gupta and Company Vs South Eastern Coalfield Limited