M/S. Thalappakatti Naidu v. Maharaja Thalapakattu Biriyani

Madras HC5 Dec 2014CONT P/2840/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a contempt proceeding under the Contempt of Courts Act for alleged wilful disobedience of an order to change a business name, the respondent explained the delay and filed an affidavit offering an apology. The petitioner had no objection, and the court closed the petition upon recording the respondent's statement.

What did the court decide?

The Contempt Petition is ordered to be closed upon recording the respondent's statement and apology.

M/S. Thalappakatti Naidu Vs Maharaja Thalapakattu Biriyani — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2014)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 05.12.2014

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN

¶6

Cont.P.No.2840 of 2014

¶7

¶8

O.A.No.122 of 2014 in C.S.No.94 of 2014

¶9

M/s. Thalappakatti Naidu Ananda Vilas Biriyani Hotel Rep. by its Partner, D.Nagasamy, N.15, East Car Street, Dindigul. ... Petitioner

¶10

versus

¶11

Maharaja Thalapakattu Biriyani Rep. by Elumalai Having its Restaurant at No.11-A, 3rd Cross Street, Raja Annamalaipuram, Chennai - 600 028. ... Respondent

¶12

Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondent for having willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in O.A.No.122 of 2014 in C.S.No.94 of 2014, dated 10.06.2014.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Jenasenan For Respondent : Mrs. Tamizhselvi for M/s. P.Devadass Associates

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The Contempt Petition has been filed by the petitioner herein, seeking an order to punish the respondents for committing contempt, on the ground that there was willful disobedience of the order, dated 10.06.2014 passed by this https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Court in O.A.No.122 of 2014 in C.S.No.94 of 2014.

¶16

¶17

Today, when the matter was taken up, the

¶18

respondent, Elumalai appeared before this Court has filed an affidavit that he has changed the name of the business, that was run by him in the name and style of Thalapakattu Biriyani & Fast Food, wherein it is stated in paragraph 5 of the affidavit as follows :

¶19

"I submit that on 21.11.2014, I instructed my son Mr.E.Suresh Kumar, Proprietor of M/s.Maharaja Thalapakattu Biryani to change the name of his business. I submit in obedience of the order passed by this Hon'ble Court, my son E.Suresh Kumar has changed the name of his business as "Maharaja Biriyani" and deleted the name "Thalapakattu". I submit that I have already filed photographs in this Hon'ble Court on 28.11.2014. I submit that the act of retaining the name till 21.11.2014 is neither wanton nor wilful. I offer my sincere and unconditional apology for having acted in such a manner. I undertake not to commit any such act in future. "

¶20

Considering the same, the learned counsel appearing

¶21

for the petitioner has no objection in closing this petition. Recording the said statement of the contemnor, this Contempt Petition is ordered to be closed. Tsvn

¶22

SD/DEPUTY REGISTRAR(OS) //Certified to be true copy//

¶23

Dated at Madras this the day of 2014.

¶24

COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

¶25

VP/CO/06/01/2015

M/S. Thalappakatti Naidu v. Maharaja Thalapakattu Biriyani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S. Thalappakatti Naidu v. Maharaja Thalapakattu Biriyani

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Will of Lakshmi Kanthaammal Vs B.Krishnamoorthi

Kannan Vs S.Damodaran

Sundarakanthi Vs B.N.Govindaraj

R.Chendilvel Vs G.Damodaran

N.Rangan Vs Government of Tamilnadu

Smt.R.Vijayalakshmi Vs the Chairman