In a contempt petition challenging a belated compliance with a prior order, the court held the order was complied with but granted liberty to file a fresh writ petition. The contempt petition was closed.
Liberty to file a fresh writ petition; 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.892 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 21.06.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
Cont. P(MD)No.892 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)No.17114 of 2022
N.Ramamoorthy ... Petitioner
Vs.
J.Vijayalakshmi The Revenue Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondent
Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the respondent for committing Contempt of Court by violating the order of this Court dated 02.08.2022 passed in W.P.(MD)No.17114 of 2022.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.R.Venkatesan
For Respondent : Mr.D.Sasikumar
1/2
Cont. P(MD)No.892 of 2024
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J.
rmi
ORDER
The order of this Court has been complied with though belatedly. The petitioner is given liberty to file a fresh writ petition challenging the impugned order. The contempt petition is closed.
21.06.2024
Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No rmi To The Revenue Tahsildar, Kariyapatti Taluk, Virudhunagar District.
Cont. P(MD)No.892 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)No.17114 of 2022
21.06.2024
2/2
1 provisions across 1 enactments
N.Ramamoorthy
J.Vijayalakshmi
G.R. Swaminathan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
