Dismissed¶19

S.Vaidyanathan v. Renuka Devi

Madras HC8 Oct 2025CONT P/2098/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Contempt petition dismissed - Madras HC (Ilanthiraiyan, J., 08.10.2025): Cont.P.No.2098 of 2025 under Section 11, Contempt of Courts Act 1971, alleging respondent (Renuka Devi, Project Officer, SIPCOT Hosur, Krishnagiri) wilfully disobeyed order dt. 04.10.2024 in W.P.No.26190 of 2024 directing execution of sale deed for MIG Flat No.B-16, SIPCOT Housing Colony within two weeks; petitioner failed to appear on 25.09.2025 / co-operate with draft sale deed registration; no wilful default, no contempt made out; petition stands dismissed. Keywords: contempt, non-compliance, sale deed execution, SIPCOT Hosur.

What did the court decide?

The court found that although the petitioner was served with E-mail and communications regarding the draft sale deed, he did not appear before the respondent and failed to co-operate with the registration of the sale deed.

S.Vaidyanathan Vs Renuka Devi — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Cont.P.No.2098 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 08.10.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶6

Cont.P.No.2098 of 2025

¶7

S.Vaidyanathan ... Petitioner Vs. Renuka Devi Project Officer, SIPCOT, Hosur, Krishnagiri District. ... Respondent

¶8

Prayer:- Contempt petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the respondent for by willfully and deliberately disobeying the orders passed by this Court dated 04.10.2024 in W.P.No.26190 of 2024.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Vaidyanathan For Respondent : Mr.Abhishek Murthy Standing Counsel ORDER

¶10

This Contempt Petition has been filed to punish the respondent for

¶11

non compliance of the order dated 04.10.2024, passed by this Court in

¶12

W.P.No.26190 of 2024, thereby directing the respondent to execute sale dee in

¶13

Page 1 of 4

¶14

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

¶15

Cont.P.No.2098 of 2025

¶16

favour of the petitioner in respect of MIG Flat No.B-16, SIPCOT Housing Colony within a period of two weeks.

¶17

While pending the Contempt Petition, this Court directed the petitioner to appear before the respondent on 25.09.2025 and on his appearance, the respondent shall register the subject property in favour of the petitioner. However, though the petitioner was served with E-mail and communications in respect of the draft sale deed, the petitioner did not appear before the respondent and failed to co-operate with the registration of sale deed.

¶18

Therefore no will full default on the part of the respondent for disobedience of the order passed by this Court, no contempt is made as against the respondents and the contempt petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶19