V.Nagaraj v. Manivel
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court addressed a contempt petition challenging non-compliance with an order dated 15.06.2012. Finding that the respondent was willing to consider the petitioner's claim as per the earlier order, the Court held that no further adjudication on merits was required and closed the petition.
What did the court decide?
The contempt petition stands closed. No costs.
What the court decided
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.10.2017
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
Cont.P.No.245 of 2016
V.Nagaraj
S/o.Vedichi,
Thalavayee Alli Post,
Indoor (Via)
Dharmapuri District. ... Petitioner
Vs
Mr.Manivel,
Superintending Engineer,(Tangedco)
Dharmapuri Electricity Distribution Circle,
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board,
Dharmapuri – 5. ... Respondent
Prayer:- Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for
contempt of the order dated 15.06.2012 in W.P.No.9521 of
2012.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Jeremiah For Respondent : Mr.Anand for Mr.T.S.Gopalan & Co. * * * *
2
O R D E R
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be adjudicated on merits or closed due to the respondent's willingness to consider the claim.
Whether the respondent's letter of September 9, 2017 constitutes compliance with the earlier order in W.P.No.9521 of 2012.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
V.Nagaraj
- respondent
Mr.Manivel
Coram
S.M.Subramaniam
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court