V.Sridharan v. N.Ravichandran
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner filed a contempt petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act for wilful disobedience. The court held that since the interim order was vacated, no adjudication survived, and the petition was closed.
What did the court decide?
Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01.03.2016
CORAM:
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice T.S.Sivagnanam
Contempt Petition No. 395 of 2016
V.Sridharan ... Petitioner
Vs.
N.Ravichandran
The Commissioner,
Tambaram Municipality,
Tambaram, Chennai - 59. ... Respondent
Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the
contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the respondent for
wilful disobedience of the Order of this Court dated
16.11.2015, in W.P.No.36228 of 2015.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Tamil Arasan
For Respondent : Mr.P.Srinivas
ORDER
In the light of the fact that the interim order has
already been vacated, nothing survives in this Contempt
Petition for any adjudication. Consequently, this
Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs.
sd
SD/
JOINT REGISTRAR(OS)
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2016.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ CO/01/06/2016
One CC to Mr.P.Srinivas, Advocate, SR.2694/2016
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Sridharan
- respondent
N.Ravichandran
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