M.Chandran v. Manikandan
Case brief
What is this about?
In a contempt petition filed for disobedience of earlier orders, the court, noting the respondent's affidavit of non-disturbance, held no further adjudication was required and closed the petition.
What did the court decide?
The Contempt Petition is closed. No costs.
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.
Contp.No.847 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 15.04.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
Contempt Petition No.847 of 2020
M.Chandran, 1/299A, GNT Road, Padianallur, Chennai - 52 ...Petitioner
Vs.
Mr.Manikandan The Tasildar, Ponneri Taluk, Tiruvallur District. ...Respondent
Prayer : Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act 1971, to punish the respondent herein for the acts of Contempt of Court for his deliberate and wilful disobedience of the order dated 06.08.2010 and 26.08.2010 passed in W.M.P.No.2 of 2010 in W.P.No.17833 of 2010 on the file of this Hon'ble Court.
For Petitioner : M/s.AL.Ganthimathi For Respondent : Mr.M.Elumalai
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether further adjudication is required in the Contempt Petition after the respondent filed an affidavit of non-disturbance.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.Chandran
- respondent
Mr.Manikandan The Tasildar
Coram
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court