Disposed

P.Ananda Murugan v. P.Senthil

Madras HC19 Jun 2024CONT P/1597/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition for alleged non-compliance of a writ order directing enquiry and patta decision. The respondent's counsel produced an order dated 09.08.2023 said to comply with the direction; the petitioner disputed the manner of compliance. Recording the submission, the court closed the contempt petition, leaving the petitioner free to challenge that order.

What the court decided

AI extract

P.Ananda Murugan Vs P.Senthil — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Cont.P.No.1597 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 19.06.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Cont.P.No.1597 of 2024

¶7

P.Ananda Murugam ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

P.Senthil Tahshildar, Vellore Taluk, Vellore – 632 001. ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer:- Contempt petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the respondent for deliberately disobeying and violating the order passed by this Court made in W.P.No.27201 of 2021 dated 21.12.2021.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ganesh For Respondent : Mr.S.J.Mohammed Sathik Government Advocate

¶12

Page 1 of 4

¶13

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

¶14

Cont.P.No.1597 of 2024

¶15

ORDER

¶16

This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondent

¶17

for non compliance of the order dated 21.12.2021 passed by this Court in W.P.No.27201 of 2021, thereby directing the respondent to conduct enquiry on the representation of the petitioner dated 15.09.2021 and after issuance of notice to the counter parties, if any, and giving them opportunity of hearing, pass orders for issuance of patta on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks.

¶18

The learned Government Advocate appearing for the

¶19

respondents submitted that as directed by this Court, the respondent passed order as early as on 09.08.2023. He also produced a copy of the order dated

¶20

09.08.2023 before this Court.

¶21

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that

¶22

the respondent did not conduct enquiry as directed by this Court, and failed

¶23

to give opportunity to the petitioner.

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26

Cont.P.No.1597 of 2024

¶27

Recording the submission made by the learned Government

¶28

Advocate, this Contempt Petition is closed. If any grievances over the order, the petitioner is at liberty to challenge the same in the manner known to law.

¶29

19.06.2024

¶30

Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No

¶31

rts

¶32

¶33

The Tahshildar, Vellore Taluk, Vellore – 632 001.

¶34

Page 3 of 4

¶35

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

¶36

Cont.P.No.1597 of 2024

¶37

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

¶38

rts

¶39

Cont.P.No.1597 of 2024

¶40

19.06.2024

¶41

Page 4 of 4

¶42

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

P.Ananda Murugan v. P.Senthil

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

P.Ananda Murugan v. P.Senthil

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ambattur Infra Developers Vs The Tamilnadu Generation and Distrbution

Kumaresan Vs The District Collector

E.Ramkumar (a) Karthick Vs The Protection Officer

P.Annadurai, Vs the Regional Passport Officer

M/s.Grand Oceana Beach resort Vs The Chairman

Annai Abirami Matriculation School Vs The Chairman