Contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of an order removing encroachment. The respondents demonstrated compliance with the order, and the petitioner ratified the same. The court held the disobedience was not willful.
Contempt petition 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.
Cont.P.(MD) No.1369 of 2019
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 13.12.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH
and
THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE A.D.MARIA CLETE CONT.P.(MD)No.1369 of 2019
in
W.P.(MD)No.5910 of 2019
and
SUB.A.(MD)No.204 of 2019
M.Muniyappan ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.Krishnaveni,
Tahsildar, Srivilluputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
2.M.Saraswathi,
Tahsildar,
Watrap Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
3.Vishalakshi, Assistant Divisional Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Srivilliputhur Division, Srivilliputhur.
... Respondents
_____________ Page 1 of 5_
Cont.P.(MD) No.1369 of 2019
PRAYER:
PRAYER: Contempt Petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the contemnors / respondents for their wanton and willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P. (MD)No.5910 of 2019 dated 13.03.2019.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Thalaimutharasu For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr.J.Ashok
O R D E R
[Order of the Court was made by M.S.RAMESH, J.]
Alleging willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P. (MD)No.5910 of 2019 dated 13.03.2019, this Contempt Petition has been filed.
2. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the order under contempt has been complied with and the encroachment has been removed. He also produced the letter submitted by the petitioner stating that he had ratified the same. As such the disobedience alleged cannot be termed as wilful in nature.
_____________ Page 2 of 5_
Cont.P.(MD) No.1369 of 2019
3. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed.
[M.S.R., J.] & [A.D.M.C., J.]
13.12.2024
NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No
MR
_____________ Page 3 of 5_
Cont.P.(MD) No.1369 of 2019
To
Tahsildar,
Srivilluputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
Tahsildar,
Watrap Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
Assistant Divisional Engineer (Highways), Construction and Maintenance, Srivilliputhur Division, Srivilliputhur.
_____________ Page 4 of 5_
Cont.P.(MD) No.1369 of 2019
M.S.RAMESH, J.
and
A.D.MARIA CLETE, J.
MR
CONT.P.(MD)No.1369 of 2019
13.12.2024
_____________ Page 5 of 5_
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the disobedience of the previous court order was willful in nature?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Muniyappan
Krishnaveni
M.Saraswathi
Vishalakshi
M.S.Ramesh
A.D.Maria Clete
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
