S.Krishnasamy v. Hemanath
Case brief
What is this about?
High Court at Madras, without reporting the specifically asserted facts of the case, dismissed a contempt petition because the petitioner withdrew the case after assurances were provided.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED :: 07-03-2016
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
CONTEMPT PETITION No.155 OF 2016
S.Krishnasamy ... Petitioner
-vs-
K.Hemanth,
Member Secretary,
Pachaiyappa's Trust Board,
Chennai-30. ... Respondent
Petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to
punish the respondents, for disobedience of the order of this Court
in M.P.No.1 of 2010 in W.P.No.10549 of 2010, dated 12.05.2010.
For petitioner : Mr.C.Vediappan
for M/s.C.S.Associates
O R D E R
Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not wish to press this Contempt Petition, as the respondent has given certain assurance in the matter. He has also made an endorsement to that effect.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
S.Krishnasamy
- respondent
K.Hemanth
Coram
T.S.Sivagnanam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court