R.Ellappan v. Kanchana Devi
Case brief
What is this about?
In a writ petition filed for contempt proceedings, the Court closed the petition because the respondent produced an order rejecting the petitioner's representation, leaving nothing to adjudicate. The petitioner retains the option to challenge the rejection order.
What did the court decide?
The contempt petition is closed and no punishment is awarded.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 16.06.2014
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.K.SASIDHARAN
Contempt Petition No.996 of 2014
R.Ellappan : petitioner versus Kanchana Devi, The Headquarters Deputy Tahsildar, Ambattur Taluk, Ambattur, Chennai 53. : respondent Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents for wilfully disobeying the orders of the court dated 7 October 2013 in W.P.No.25148 of 2013.
For petitioner : Mr.G.Karthikeyan
For respondent : Mr.I.Arockiasamy, Government Advocate
O R D E R
This Court, by order dated 7 October 2013, directed the respondent to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 31 July 2013, for
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to punish the respondent for wilfully disobeying the earlier court order directing disposal of the petitioner's representation.
Whether the existence of the respondent's order rejecting the representation extinguishes the need for adjudication.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.Ellappan
- respondent
Kanchana Devi
Coram
K.K.Sasidharan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court