Dismissed

Vijayakumar, v. Sivasubramanian

Madras HC17 Apr 2021CONT P(MD)/497/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Upon the standing counsel admitting steps are underway to accommodate the petitioner in a new building, the High Court held this did not amount to contempt. The contempt petition was therefore closed, and the writ petition was adjourned for a specific stand from the Corporation.

What did the court decide?

Contempt petitions closed; writ petition adjourned for specific stand from the respondent Corporation.

Vijayakumar, Vs Sivasubramanian — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Cont.P.(MD)No.497 of 2021 Vijayakumar v. Sivasubramanian

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 17.04.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH Cont.P.(MD)No.497 of 2021 and Sub A(MD) No.108 of 2021 (Through Video Conferencing)

¶4

Vijayakumar ... Petitioner /Writ Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Sivasubramanian The Commissioner of Corporation Trichy Corporation, Trichy.

¶7

Gunasekar

¶8

The Assistant Commissioner of Corporation Srirangam Division, Trichy Corporation, Trichy. ... Contemnors/Respondents

¶9

PRAYER : Contempt Petitions are filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondents herein for his wilful deliberate and disobedience of the common order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD) No.18067 of 2019 dated 20.08.2019.

¶10

Prayer in WP(MD). 18067 of 2019 :

¶11

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court Call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.F.1/Special/2019 dt.3.8.2019 and quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondents from evicting the petitioner from his shop No.7, Water Tank Building, Marakadai, Trichy.

¶12

For Petitioner :Mr.Niranjan S.Kumar For Respondents :Mr.Saji Bino

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Corporation submitted that steps are being taken by the Corporation to complete the construction and the petitioner will be accommodated in the newly constructed building.

¶15

In the considered view of this Court, this Court had merely recorded the submission of the learned standing counsel appearing on behalf of the Corporation and as such there is no contempt committed by the respondents.

¶16

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

¶17

1/2

¶18

Cont.P.(MD)No.497 of 2021

¶19

Vijayakumar v. Sivasubramanian

¶20

In view of the above, the contempt petition is closed. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

Post W.P.(MD) Nos. 18067 of 2019 on 21.06.2021 under the caption 'for orders'. In the meantime, the respondent Corporation shall file their counter and take a specific stand, so that it can be recorded by this Court and the writ petition can be disposed of.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar (CS-I)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

¶27

Note: 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.

¶28

¶29

Sivasubramanian The Commissioner of Corporation Trichy Corporation ,Trichy. 2. The Assistant Commissioner of Corporation Srirangam Division, Trichy Corporation, Trichy.

¶30

Copy to

¶31

The Section Officer, Writ Section Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶32

Cont.P.(MD)No.497 of 2021 17.04.2021

¶33

VB (05/05/2021) 2P / 4C

¶34

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

¶35

2/2

Vijayakumar, v. Sivasubramanian

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vijayakumar, v. Sivasubramanian

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

Sarthar. A.R. Vs The District Collector

Kamal Musthaffa Vs The District Collector

Savarimuthu.S Vs the Tahsildar

Saravanan. v Vs The Assistant Director of Survey

Surulisamy Vs the District Collector

Union Club Vs the District Collector