Disposed

Greenwood Owners Association v. Rajesh Lakhani and another

Madras HC21 Apr 2023CONT P/970/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This contempt petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, was filed to punish respondents for disobeying orders dated 15.09.2021 in W.P.No.5127 of 2020. The respondents undertook to adjust excess payments towards current consumption charges. Consequently, the court closed all contempt petitions.

What did the court decide?

All contempt petitions were closed.

Greenwood Owners Association Vs Rajesh Lakhani and another — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 21.04.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

¶6

Cont.P.No.970 of 2023

¶7

Greenwood Owners Association, represented by its Secretary, Mr.Ram Prasad Greenwood, House of Hiranandani, 5/63, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, Egattur, Thalambur Post, Chennai – 600 130.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Mr.Rajesh Lakhoni, Chairman Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, 10^th Floor, NPKKR Maligai, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.

¶11

Mr.Kumar Assistant Engineer O & M, CEDC / South – II, Thalambur, Chennai – 600 130. .... Respondents

¶12

PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents herein for willful disobedience of the orders of this Court dated 15.09.2021 passed in W.P.No.5127 of 2020.

¶13

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

2 For Petitioners : Mr.Rohan Rajasekaran For Respondents : Mr.L.Jai Venkatesh Standing Counsel

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This contempt petition has been filed to punish the respondents herein for willful disobedience of the orders of this Court dated 15.09.2021 passed in W.P.No.5127 of 2020.

¶17

2.The learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the TANGEDCO submitted that pursuant to the earlier order passed by this Court, the current consumption charges are levied from the petitioner only under domestic tariff. Insofar as the adjustment of the excess amount lying with TANGEDCO is concerned, undertakes to adjust the current consumption charges from the excess amount lying with TANGEDCO.

¶18

3.In view of the above development, it will suffice to record the submissions made by the learned Standing Counsel. It is made clear that TANGEDCO will comply with the undertaking and ensure that the excess payment made by the petitioner and which is lying with TANGEDCO is duly adjusted towards the current consumption charges. There shall be no default on

¶19

this account. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶20

¶21

4.In the result, all the contempt petitions are closed.

¶22

21.04.2023 Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No ssr To

¶23

The Chairman Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation, 10th Floor, NPKKR Maligai, Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002. 2. The Assistant Engineer O & M, CEDC / South – II, Thalambur, Chennai – 600 130.

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

¶26

N.ANAND VENKATESH.,J

¶27

ssr

¶28

Cont.P.No.970 of 2023

¶29

21.04.2023

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Greenwood Owners Association v. Rajesh Lakhani and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Greenwood Owners Association v. Rajesh Lakhani and another

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

D.P.Thangaraj Vs State of TamilNadu

Ms. TamilSelvi Balan Vs The District Collector

Yuvaraj R Vs The Transport commissioner

R.Natarajan Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

K.Hassan Ali Vs Rafiullah and another

L.S.Saravanakumar Vs The Secretary