R.M.Chinnusamy v. K.a.Periyasamy
Case brief
What is this about?
In a contempt petition under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for non-compliance of a directive to deposit an award amount, this court closed the petition as the respondent had deposited the compensation, leaving any remaining discrepancy for civil remedy.
What did the court decide?
None granted; the contempt petition is closed.
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.
Cont. P.No.93 of 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 15.11.2019
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN
Cont. P.No.93 of 2019
- R.M. Chinnusamy 2. Ayyasamy 3. Chandrasekar 4. C.Susila ... Petitioners Vs.
Mr. K.A.Periyasamy, Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board, Neighbourhood Scheme, Surampatti Nall Road, Erode ... Respondent
PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1972 to punish the respondent for his willful disobedience and non-compliance of the order of this Court made in W.P.No.26313 of 2018 dated 08.10.2018 under the provisions of Contempt of Courts Act.
For Petitioner : Mr. C.Prakasam For Respondent : Mr. I. Satish A.G.P. : Mr. D.Raja, for RDO in Writ Petition.
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be dismissed on the facts that the compensation amount has been deposited.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
R.M. Chinnusamy and others
- respondent
Mr. K.A. Periyasamy, Executive Engineer, Tamil Nadu Housing Board
Coram
V. Bharathidasan
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court