The Court dismissed a contempt petition after the Government Pleader submitted that the underlying order in W.P.No.836 of 2006 had been set aside, rendering the present petition moot.
Petition closed.
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.780 of 2010
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.03.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
Cont.P.No.780 of 2010
R.Thiagarajan, 7/258, 176th Street, Muthamizh Nagar, Kodungaiyur, Chennai 600 118 ... Petitioner
Vs
1.K.Chandrasekaran,
Special Officer, The Tamil Nadu State Palmgur and Fibre Marketing Cooperative Federation Ltd, 108, Gengu Reddy Road, Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.
2.V.Shobhana
Collector of Chennai, Chennai – 600 001.
3.R.Padmini
Tahsildar,
Egmore -Nungambakkam Taluk, Chetpet, Chennai – 600 031.
... Respondents
Prayer: Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P.No.836 of 2006 dated 07.07.2008.
1/3
Cont.P.No.780 of 2010
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Praveenkumar for Mr.P.Anbarasan
For Respondent : Mr.M.Elumalai Additional Government Pleader for R2 and R3
ORDER
Mr.M.Elumalai, Additional Government Pleader for the Respondent
submits that the order passed by this Court in W.P. No. 836 of 2006 dated
07.07.2008 has been set aside and nothing survives in this contempt petition.
Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is closed.
SD/ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) jas
//Certified to be true copy//
Dated at Madras this the day of 2022.
COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format. GS/21/06/2021
Notes :-In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.
2/3
Cont.P.No.780 of 2010
To
3/3
R.Thiagarajan
K.Chandrasekaran
V.Shobhana
R.Padmini
C. Saravanan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
