Father filed contempt alleging disobedience of interim order directing petroleum authorities to supply products to his son's firm pending reconstitution. Court held any violation of the settlement terms between the parties is a matter for separate remedy, not contempt, and closed the petition.
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.No.780 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 16.08.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M. DHANDAPANI
Cont.P.No.780 of 2021
and Sub Application (OS) No.640 of 2022
V.M.Thulasingam
... Petitioner
Vs.
M/s.Sekher Enterprises, Represented by its Proprietor T.Rajashekher, No.116, Srivari Baba Nagar, Redembadu Road, Kummidipoondi – 601 201, Thiruvallur District. ... Respondent
Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondents for committing contempt of Court by willful disobedience of the interim order passed by this Court dated 19.09.2018, made in W.P.No.9851 of 2018.
For Petitioner : M/s.Rukmani Venugopalan
For Respondents : Mr.P.S.Seetharaman
Page 1 of 4
Cont.P.No.780 of 2021
O R D E R
The 3rd respondent in the writ petition, who is the father of the Proprietor of the writ petitioner firm, has filed this Contempt Petition, alleging disobedience of the interim order passed by this Court, dated 19.09.2018, in W.P.No.9851 of 2018.
2.The contemnor/writ petitioner filed the writ petition for mandamus directing the respondents therein to release the supply of motor sput (petrol) to the dispensing pump at No.245, GNT Road, Gummudipoondi Town, Thiruvallur District, for the price money remitted by the writ petitioner and to allow the writ petitioner to continue to run the business pending reconstitution.
3.During the pendency of the writ petition, there was a compromise between the writ petitioner/son and the contempt petitioner/father. In view of the compromise, this Court, as an interim arrangement, by order dated 19.09.2018, in W.P.No.9851 of 2018, directed the Petroleum authorities to supply petroleum products to the writ petitioner. However, now, the Page 2 of 4
Cont.P.No.780 of 2021
contempt petitioner/father claims that the settlement was violated by the writ petitioner/son. The fact remains that, in view of the dispute between the contempt petitioner/father and the contemnor/son, the Petroleum authorities are not supplying petroleum products to the writ petitioner firm. Hence, the present Contempt Petition is filed.
4.If there is any violation of the terms of settlement between the partners, it is for them to work out their remedy separately in the manner known to law, but not by way of filing a Contempt Petition before this Court. There is no scope for entertaining a Contempt Petition in this regard. Accordingly, this Contempt Petition is closed. Consequently, connected application is closed.
16.08.2024
mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
Page 3 of 4
Cont.P.No.780 of 2021
mkn
Cont.P.No.780 of 2021
16.08.2024
Page 4 of 4
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a contempt petition lies for alleged violation of a private settlement between father and son regarding supply of petroleum products to the firm.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
V.M.Thulasingam
M/s.Sekher Enterprises, represented by its Proprietor T.Rajashekher
M. Dhandapani
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
