Alleged non-compliance with a writ court order was resolved when the respondent passed the required order on 13.12.2023. The contempt petition was closed, leaving the petitioner free to challenge that order if so advised.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 05.01.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
Cont.P.No.2859 of 2023
M.Edhin Frank
... Petitioner
-vs-
S.Visakan, The Managing Director, (TASMAC) Office of the Managing Director, TASMAC Ltd., 4th Floor CMDA Tower - II, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008. ... Respondent
PRAYER : Contempt petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971, pleased to punish the respondent for violating the
order dated 12/04/2023 in W.P.No.11047 of 2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Madhu Prakash
For Respondent : Mr.K.Sathish Kumar, SC (TASMAC)
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J
1/2
ORDER
rna
In compliance with the order of this Court dated 12.04.2023, learned counsel for the alleged contemnor states that an order was passed on 13.12.2023. A copy of the said order has been placed on record. Consequently, this contempt petition is closed by leaving it open to the petitioner to challenge the order if deemed appropriate.
05.01.2024
rna Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation: Yes / No
Cont.P.No.2859 of 2023
2/2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Edhin Frank
S.Visakan, The Managing Director, TASMAC Ltd.
Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
