Dismissed

The General Manager v. R.Murali

Madras HC9 Jul 2021CONT P/1960/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a batch of contempt petitions filed by the Petitioner against various respondents. The respondents were accused of filing civil suits while suppressing the pendency of related writ petitions challenging the cancellation of their Aavin Parlour allotments. The court held that no material on willful disobedience was placed and summarily closed the petitions.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petitions closed; directed petitioner to seek remedy in W.P.Nos.12997 to 13007 of 2013 or in the civil suits.

The General Manager Vs R.Murali — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

Dated 09.07.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR

¶6

Cont. Petn. No.1960, 1961, 1962, 1963,1964, 1965,1966, 1967, 1968, 1969 and1970, of 2014

¶7

Cont. Petn. No.1960 of 2014

¶8

The General Manager, Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

R. Murali, No.6/1, Saradha College Road, South Alagapuram, Salem – 636 004 ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1960 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under

¶12

Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing a suit in O.S.No.71 of 2014 dt.28/01/2014 on the file of the District Munsif, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.12997 of 2013 before this court.

¶13

Cont. Petn. No.1961 of 2014

¶14

The General Manager, Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶15

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

¶16

Page 1 of 9

¶17

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶18

Vs.

¶19

E.Sekar,

¶20

No.27, Velasamy St., Arisipalayam, Salem – 636 009

¶21

... Respondent

¶22

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1961 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.75 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.12998 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶23

Cont. Petn. No.1962 of 2014

¶24

The General Manager, Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶25

Vs.

¶26

C.Asokan, No.18-1/11A, Avvaiyar St., Subramania Nagar, Salem – 636 005 ... Respondent

¶27

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1962 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.72 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.12999 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶28

Cont. Petn. No.1963 of 2014

¶29

The General Manager,

¶30

Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers

¶31

Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶32

Vs.

¶33

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

¶34

Page 2 of 9

¶35

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶36

Thilkaj Banu,

¶37

No.30-2, 2^nd Darman Nagar,

¶38

Suramangalam, Salem – 636 005

¶39

... Respondent

¶40

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1963 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.73 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13000 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶41

Cont. Petn. No.1964 of 2014

¶42

The General Manager,

¶43

Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers

¶44

Union Limited, Sithanur,

¶45

Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302.

¶46

... Petitioner

¶47

Vs.

¶48

S.Balamani, No.296/471, Chinnappan Street, Arisipalayam, Salem 636 009

¶49

... Respondent

¶50

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1964 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.70 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13001 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶51

Cont. Petn. No.1965 of 2014

¶52

The General Manager,

¶53

Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers

¶54

Union Limited, Sithanur,

¶55

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶56

Page 3 of 9

¶57

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

Vs.

R.P.N.Ravi,

Anna Nagar 2^nd St.,

Mamagam, Salem – 636 005

¶62

... Respondent

¶63

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1965 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.79 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13002 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶64

Cont. Petn. No.1966 of 2014

¶65

The General Manager, Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302.

¶66

... Petitioner

¶67

Vs.

¶68

B.S.Jayamani, No.47/15, Syed Kadhar Street, Arisipalayam, Salem – 636 009 ... Respondent

¶69

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1966 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.77 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13003 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶70

Cont. Petn. No.1967 of 2014

¶71

The General Manager,

¶72

Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers

¶73

Union Limited, Sithanur,

¶74

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶75

Page 4 of 9

¶76

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶77

Vs.

¶78

Tamilarasan@Nandakumar,

¶79

No.25, Velasamy St.,

¶80

Arisipalayam, Salem – 636 009

¶81

... Respondent

¶82

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1967 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.76 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13004 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶83

Cont. Petn. No.1968 of 2014

¶84

The General Manager, Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶85

Vs.

¶86

S.Baskar No.68, Chairman Sadagoban St., Salem – 636 001 ... Respondent

¶87

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1968 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.81 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13005 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶88

Cont. Petn. No.1969 of 2014

¶89

The General Manager,

¶90

Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur,

¶91

Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner

¶92

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

¶93

Page 5 of 9

¶94

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶95

Vs.

¶96

Uma,

¶97

No.316, Vellalar St., Mahendrapuri, Salem – 636 007

¶98

... Respondent

¶99

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1969 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.78 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13006 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶100

Cont. Petn. No.1970 of 2014

¶101

The General Manager,

¶102

Salem District Co-operative Milk Producers Union Limited, Sithanur, Thalavaipatty Post, Salem 636 302. ... Petitioner Vs.

¶103

Sahul Hameed, No.55B, West Makkam St., Salem – 636 005 ... Respondent

¶104

PRAYER in Cont.Petn. No.1970 of 2014 : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for filing suit in O.S.No.74 of 2014 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.13007 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court.

¶105

In all the contempt petitions

¶106

For petitioner : Mr.V.Venkatesan

¶107

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

¶108

Page 6 of 9

¶109

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶110

COMMON ORDER

¶111

This contempt petitions have been filed by the petitioner to

¶112

punish the respondents for filing the respective original suits before the District Munsif, Salem by willfully suppressing the pendency of W.P.No.12997 to 13007 of 2013 before this court. Since the issues involved these contempt petitions are identical, they are disposed of by this common order.

¶113

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted

¶114

that the petitioner had appointed various persons / allottees including the respondents to run the Aavin Parlours with a specific condition that only Aavin Milk and Milk products shall be sold in the Aavin Parlours. But, since the allottees including the respondents had violated the above condition, the petitioner had passed orders on 04.04.2012 cancelling the order of allotment. Challenging the above said order, the allottees have filed W.P.Nos.12786 to 12798 of 2012 before this court. In the meanwhile, the Corporation council had passed a resolution No.216 dated 29.10.2012, cancelling the permission granted in favour of the allottees to run the Aavin parlours.

¶115

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

¶116

Page 7 of 9

¶117

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶118

2.1. He further contended that, this court vide order dated

¶119

21.03.2013 had set aside the order of cancellation of licence passed by the

¶120

petitioner and had directed the petitioner to pass order, after considering the explanation submitted by the respondent.

¶121

2.2. It is further contended by the counsel for the petitioner that in compliance of the orders passed by this court, the petitioner had passed detailed order of cancellation of allotment on 18.04.2013, by considering all the aspects. Challenging the above said order and the resolution of the Corporation dated 29.10.2012, the respondents have filed W.P.No.12997 to 13007 of 2013 before this court and interim stay was granted on 26.01.2013. The petitioner as well as Corporation of Salem, have filed counter affidavits and also vacate stay petition. All the parties were heard by this court and orders were reserved on 03.10.2013. While that being so, the respondents have filed the respective suit for permanent injunction restraining the petitioner herein and the Corporation from evicting them from the suit property forcibly, unless under due process of law. In that suits, interim injunctions were also granted. However, the respondents have not disclosed anything about the pendency of the writ petitions in W.P.Nos.12997 to 13007 of 2013 before this court. Hence, this

¶122

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

¶123

Page 8 of 9

¶124

Cont. Petn. 1960 of 2014 etc. batch

¶125

Considering the fact that the petitioner has filed the present contempt petition as against the respondents and the respondents have filed

¶126

the respective suits before the District Munsif, Salem, prima facie, it shows that no materials has been placed to satisfy this court that the contempt petition is maintainable, as against the civil suits filed by the respondents. Further, no case is made out against the respondents for willfull disobedience of the orders passed in the writ petitions in W.P.No.1297 to 13007 of 2013 by this court.

¶127

Therefore, the petitioner is directed to seek appropriate remedy, either before this court in the above said writ petitions in w.P.No.12997 to 13007 of 2013 or before the concerned court in the above suits in O.S.No.70 to 79 & 81 of 2014, or challenge the above said suits in the

¶128

manner known to law.

¶129

With the above observations, this contempt petition is closed.

¶130

SD/-

¶131

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES)

¶132

mst

¶133

//Certified to be true copy//

¶134

Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶135

COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25^th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ GS/09/08/2021

¶136

Page 9 of 9

The General Manager v. R.Murali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The General Manager v. R.Murali

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kannan Vs Tamilnadu Industrial

M/s.sri Devi Karumariamman Educationl Trust Vs All India Council for Technical Education

M.Meena Vs The Chairman

R.Thangavelu Vs The State of TamilNadu

Thiru.Param Nursery & Vs The Director

M/s.Manchester Textiles P Ltd. Vs Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Limited (Tangedco)