R.Santhanam v. K.Senathipathi
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged failure to pay 10% interest on terminal benefits settled at 6%. Court denied further penalty, allowing 6% interest as settled, citing uniformity and financial constraints, and dismissed contempt plea.
What did the court decide?
No further adjudication in contempt application. Petitioner to accept 6% interest already settled. No costs.
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 : 03.10.2018 CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
Cont.P.No.2081 of 2018
R.Santhanam ... Petitioner
Vs
K.Senathipathi The General Manager, Taminadu State Transport Corporation (Coimbatore) Ltd, Chennimalai Road, Erode Region, Erode.
... Respondent
PRAYER: This Contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, praying to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 27.07.2017 made in W.P.No.9439 of 2017.
O R D E R
The relief sought for in this Contempt petition is to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 27.07.2017 made in W.P.No.9439 of 2017.
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent should be punished for failing to pay 10% interest on terminal benefits when 6% was already disbursed to similarly placed employees.
Whether to grant additional adjudication on interest rates in the face of financial crunch and discrimination concerns.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.Santhanam
- respondent
K.Senathipathi
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