Disposed

V Balasubramaniam v. Mr Sundararaj

Madras HC21 Oct 2021CONT P/506/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed a contempt petition against a Thasildar for disobedience of a court order. The court directed parties to submit fresh representations and conduct an enquiry within specified timelines before passing orders on merits.

What did the court decide?

Parties at liberty to submit fresh representations; respondent directed to conduct enquiry and pass orders on merits within twelve weeks.

V Balasubramaniam Vs Mr Sundararaj — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Cont.P.No.506 of 2011

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 21.10.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Cont.P.No.506 of 2011

¶7

V.Balasubramaniam, No.10, P.N.Road, 3^rd Street, Tiruppur 2

¶8

A.Syed Farook, No.48, Angeripalayam Road, Tiruppur 2 ... Petitioners

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Sunderraj The Thasildar, Coimbatore North, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District. ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, to punish the respondent for his wilful as well as deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court made in W.P.No.21701 of 2010 dated 20.10.2010 under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

¶12

For Petitioners : No Appearance For Respondent : Mr.Richardson Wilson Government Advocate

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondent for his

¶15

wilful as well as deliberate disobedience of the order of this Court made in

¶16

W.P.No.21701 of 2010 dated 20.10.2010 under Contempt of Courts Act,

¶17

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

¶18

1/3

¶19

Cont.P.No.506 of 2011

¶20

1971, thereby directing the respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation dated 15.04.2010 within a period of six weeks

¶21

from the date of receipt of a copy of that order.

¶22

According to the petitioners, the respondent did not comply with

¶23

the order passed by this Court. The representation was submitted by the petitioners on 15.04.2010. Therefore, it cannot be considered after a period of 11 years, since the copy of the representation cannot be available with records of the respondent.

¶24

Therefore, the petitioners are at liberty to submit a fresh representation on fresh cause of action to the respondent within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the same, the respondent is directed to conduct enquiry on the representation, after issuance of notice to the counter party, if any and pass orders on merits

¶25

and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks thereafter.

¶26

With the above direction, this contempt petition is disposed of.

¶27

SD/-

¶28

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES)

¶29

¶30

//Certified to be true copy//

¶31

Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

¶32

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/29/10/2021

¶33

2/3

¶34

Cont.P.No.506 of 2011

¶35

¶36

The Thasildar, Coimbatore North, Coimbatore, Coimbatore District.

¶37

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

¶38

3/3

V Balasubramaniam v. Mr Sundararaj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V Balasubramaniam v. Mr Sundararaj

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

M/s.Ceebros Hotels Pvt.Ltd., Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

M.Muthiah Pandian (Deceased) Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

Tmt.Palaniammal Vs The State of Tamil Nadu

T.Prabakaran Vs The District Collector

H.Bala Reddy, Vs The District Revenue Officer

Mr.Balu @ Balakrishnan (Deceased), Vs The District Collector