Contempt petition challenging non-compliance with a writ order regarding cancellation of a patta was dismissed as the respondent Special Government Pleader submitted details showing the court order had been fully complied with.
The contempt petition was closed with no costs awarded to the petitioner.
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.(MD)No.844 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.02.2021 CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.PARTHIBAN
Cont.P.(MD)No.844 of 2020
C.Palanisamy ... Petitioner/Petitioner
Vs.
Thirunavukarasu, The Tahsildar, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Ponnamaravathi, Pudukkottai District.
... Contemnor/2nd Respondent
PRAYER: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the contemnor/2nd Respondent for his willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.23683 of 2019, dated 11.11.2019.
Prayer in WP(MD). 23683 of 2019 :
Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court directing the 2nd respondent to cancel the patta stands in the name of the 3rd respondent for the properties comprised in survey no 614/3 to the extent of 0.3.50 hectares and Survey No.618 to the extent of 2.1.00 hectares and the entire extent of 2.4050 hectarees in Karaiyur village, Ponnamaravathi Taluk, Pudhukottai District for patta No.787, New patta No.3766 by conducting an enquiry in the light of the 1st respondents letter O.Mu.Aa 3/5892/2019, dt.22/10/2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Santhanakrishnan For Respondent : Mr.C.Ramesh Special Government Pleader ***
ORDER
When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent would submit that the order passed by this Court in the above W.P.(MD)No.23683 of 2019, dated 11.11.2019, has been complied with. The details of the action taken to comply with the directions are stated in paragraph 6 of the counter affidavit which is extracted hereunder:
1/2
Cont.P.(MD)No.844 of 2020
“6.I respectfully submit to state that the first respondent after considering the report of the second respondent as well as the enquiries made with the petitioner and the third respondent has passed order cancelling the patta issued in Taluk No.T.R.2018/0103/22/054798TR dated 31.07.2018 and remained the patta in the name of the petitioner in his proceedings No.R.C.No.3243/2019/A3, dated 27.10.2020. The above order was incorporated in the revenue records as per Taluk R.C.No.7842/2019/B2, dated 29.10.2020 and necessary changes was also incorporated in the computer records. The copy of the above said orders were handed over to the writ petitioner on 31.10.2020 and he also acknowledged the same in person. I therefore submit to state that the prayer of the petitioner was complied with after due enquiry and based on the documents produced by the petitioner and the third respondent. Now, the lands in S.F.No.614/3 and 618 of Karaiyur Village has been entered in the name of the original pattadar namely M.Chinnsamy, Kangani, S/o.Murugan in patta No.787 of Karaiyur Village, Ponnnamaravathy Taluk.”
2.In view of the above averments, this Court is convinced that the order passed by this Court has been complied with and therefore, the Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs.
Assistant Registrar(AD-II)
/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
SRM
To
Cont.P.(MD)No.844 of 2020 03.02.2021
NA(CO)
TR(17.02.2021) 2P 4C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
2/2
2 provisions across 2 enactments
C. Palanisamy
Thirunavukarasu, The Tahsildar
V. Parthiban
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
