A.Abdul Azeez v. R.Ponmudi
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioner challenged respondent's calculation of backwages under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act. The court held that since an articulate calculation was furnished and a fresh cause of action arose via a writ petition, the contempt application was not maintainable.
What did the court decide?
Petitioner directed to pursue remedy in Writ Petition No.3147 of 2021 regarding the calculation of backwages.
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.1739 OF 2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 17.02.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
CONT.P.NO.1739 OF 2019 in CONT.P.No.2667 of 2018
A.Abdul Azeez, No.41-B, Nagoorsalai, P.Konthagai, Thittacherri 609 703, Nagapattinam District .. Petitioner/Petitioner
Versus R.Ponmudi Managing Director Tamilnadu State Transport Corporation Ltd., Kumbakonam Division Kumbakonam – 612 001. .. Respondent/Respondent
PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for his wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order dated 01.03.2019 made in Cont.Pet.No.2667 of 2018.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sivakumar For Respondent : Mr.D.Venkatachalam
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the complaint of deliberate wrong calculation by the respondent in settlement of backwages amounts to contempts of court.
Whether the petitioner can maintain an application for punishment in contempt of court proceedings when ample other remedy is available in writ petition.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
A.Abdul Azeez
- respondent
R.Ponmudi
Coram
M.Govindaraj
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court