Dismissed

High Court of Madras v. T.Rajheshekher

Madras HC16 Apr 2021CONT P/148/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras, in suo motu contempt proceedings, closed the petition after the contemnor deposited demand drafts totaling Rs.1,85,000 towards an agreed settlement. The court recalled the issued warrant, which closed the sub-application, and addressed representations regarding counsel deletions.

What did the court decide?

Suo Motu Contempt Petition and Sub Application closed; warrant recalled; representations for counsel name deletion allowed.

High Court of Madras Vs T.Rajheshekher — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 16.4.2021 CORAM

¶3

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶4

Suo Motu Contempt Petition No.148 of 2020 and

¶5

Sub Application No.245 of 2020

¶6

High Court of Madrs Petitioner

¶7

¶8

T.Rajhashekher, No.245, G.N.T.Road, Gummidipoondi, Thiruvallur District 601 201 Respondent

¶9

Suo Motu Contempt Petition proceedings initiated against the contemnor herein as per the order of this court dated 3.1.2020 made in W.P.Nos.27012 of 2019, 5694 and 9851 of 2018 and W.M.P.Nos.11778, 31625 of 2018 and 28799, 32771 of 2019 vide Roc.No.625/2020/OS.

¶10

For contemnor : Mr.P.S.Sethuraman

¶11

ORDER

¶12

Mr.P.S.Sethuraman, learned counsel appearing for the contemnor was

¶13

present when the matter was called at 2.15 pm today. The learned counsel appearing for the contemnor submitted that he is in possession of two Demand Drafts one for Rs.1,80,000/- and another for Rs.5000/- drawn in favour of V.M.Thulasingam.

¶14

The matter was passed over and when it was taken up at 4.45 pm in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Chambers, Mr.V.M.Thulasingam was also present and the learned

¶15

¶16

counsel appearing for the contemnor has handed over the demand drafts as

¶17

detailed hereunder:-

¶18

D.D.No.004094 dated 15.4.2021 for Rs.1,80,000/-

¶19

D.D.No.004096 dated 15.4.2021 for Rs.5000/-, both drawn at AXIS Bank, Gummidipoondi Branch.

¶20

The learned Advocate Commissioner also informed the court that

¶21

she had been paid her remuneration as directed by this court.

¶22

With this, the Suo Motu Contempt Petition is closed as the agreement between V.M.Thulasingam and the contemnor T.Rajhasekher has been given effect to. It is hoped that the contemnor T.Rajhasekher would pay the agreed monthly sum of Rs.15,000/- to his father V.M.Thulasingam without any further direction of any court.

¶23

A representation is made by Mr.L.Dhamodaran, learned counsel that his name may be deleted in the cause list.

¶24

As the contempt petition itself is closed, nothing survives and the learned counsel Mr.L.Dhamodaran's name may be deleted in the cause list as he does not appear for Mr.V.M.Thulasingam and had also given change of vakalat.

¶25

A representation is also made by Ms.T.Aananthi, learned counsel, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ who previously appeared for T.Rajhashekher, who had been instrumental for

¶26

¶27

the settlement that had been reached between the parties in the Chambers of

¶28

a learned Judge. The learned counsel has expressed a grievance that she has

¶29

been pressured by both the parties and as a consequence, she had faced some issues before the Bar Council also and fortunately, after the Suo Motu Contempt having been initiated against the contemnor, she had come out of such issues before the Bar Council. She has also expressed that she has not been paid any fees by the contemnor.

¶30

Mr. Sethuraman, learned counsel for the contemnor may address the said issue and ensure that the said issue is settled amicably.

¶31

It is submitted by the learned counsel for the contemnor that he had

¶32

filed an application for clarification and such Application may be listed alongwith the writ petitions before the appropriate court.

¶33

In view of the above developments, the contempt petition is

¶34

closed. Consequently, the Sub Application is closed and the warrant issued is recalled.

¶35

SD/-

¶36

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES)

¶37

ssk

¶38

//Certified to be true copy//

¶39

Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶40

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

¶41

from 25^th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

GS/01/07/2021

The Superintendent of Police, Tiruvallur

¶46

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras

¶47

Copy ot:

¶48

The Section Officer, Legal Cell, High Court, Madras

¶49

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

High Court of Madras v. T.Rajheshekher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

High Court of Madras v. T.Rajheshekher

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.K.Giridharan Vs K.Baskar

Velu @ Velmurugan Vs S.Abdul Kapoor

K.R.Myilsamy Vs P.Nirmala

Marayal Vs P.P.Ramanandam

S.Charlie Vs a.Mariappan

S.B.Shaik Azeezuddin Vs S.Feroz Khan