The Single Judge dismissed a sub-application seeking to reopen a contempt petition, holding that the appropriate remedy was to challenge the Single Judge's order via an appeal or file a contempt petition as originally ordered. The application was thereby closed.
Sub Application No.720 of 2022 stands 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.
Sub Application No.720 of 2022
Sub Application (OS) No.720 of 2022 in Cont P.No.1436 of 2022
M.S.RAMESH, J.
The present application seeking to reopen the contempt petition cannot
be sustained since the order passed in Contempt Petition No.1436 of 2022 is on the ground that the order of learned Single Judge and Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court have been merged and that the view taken by the learned Single Judge was that the contempt petition requires to be enforced by Hon'ble Division Bench. Appropriate remedy would be either to challenge the order passed by learned Single Judge in Contempt Petition No.1436 of 2022 by way of a contempt appeal or in alternative filed a contempt petition as ordered by learned Single Judge in Contempt Petition No.1436 of 2022.
2.With the above observation, Sub Application No.720 of 2022 in Contempt Petition No.1436 of 2022 stands closed.
16.12.2022
skr/mk
1/2
Sub Application No.720 of 2022
M.S.RAMESH, J.
skr/mk
Sub Application (OS) No.720 of 2022 in Cont P.No.1436 of 2022
16.12.2022
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a sub-application seeking to reopen a contempt petition can be sustained when the earlier order was based on a merger of the Single Judge order and the Division Bench view.
M.S.RAMESH
M.K.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
