Disposed

C.N.Meenakshi v. Mr. K.S.Palanisami and another

Madras HC2 Dec 2025CONT P/3007/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a previous order directing the second respondent to send a report to the first respondent. The court recorded satisfaction that the order has been complied with based on documents produced by the respondents and closed the petition.

What did the court decide?

Contempt Petition closed recording compliance with the previous order.

C.N.Meenakshi Vs Mr. K.S.Palanisami and another — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 02.12.2025

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

¶6

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶7

C.N.Meenakshi ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.Mr.K.S.Palanisami, Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai.

¶10

2.Mr.R.Suman, District Revenue Officer, Namakkal District, Namakkal. ... Respondents

¶11

Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts

¶12

Act, 1971, to punish the respondents/1st respondent for their willful disobedience of the order of this Court in W.P.No.17264 of 2024 dated

¶13

04.07.2024.

¶14

Page 1 of 6

¶15

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

¶16

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025 For Petitioner : Mr.J.Antony Jesus For R1 and R2 : Mr.D.Ravichandar Special Government Pleader

¶17

O R D E R

¶18

This Contempt Petition is filed alleging willful disobedience of the

¶19

order of this Court in W.P.No.17264 of 2024 dated 04.07.2024, wherein, this

¶20

Court had directed the 2nd respondent to consider the representation of the

¶21

Police Station and send a report to the 1st respondent.

¶22

2.Now, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents would submit that the order of this Court has been complied with. He has also produced a copy of the proposal sent by the 2nd respondent to the 1st respondent, in Na.Ka.No.28079/2016/O1, dated

¶23

08.12.2024.

¶24

Page 2 of 6

¶25

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

¶26

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶27

3.In view of the above, this Contempt Petition is closed recording

¶28

compliance.

¶29

02.12.2025

¶30

mkn Internet : Yes Index : Yes / No Speaking order / Nonspeaking order Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶31

¶32

1.The Commissioner of Land Administration, Chepauk, Chennai.

¶33

2.The District Revenue Officer, Namakkal District, Namakkal.

¶34

Page 3 of 6

¶35

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

¶36

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶37

N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.

¶38

mkn

¶39

Page 4 of 6

¶40

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

¶41

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶42

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶43

Page 5 of 6

¶44

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

¶45

Cont.P.No.3007 of 2025

¶46

02.12.2025

¶47

Page 6 of 6

¶48

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

C.N.Meenakshi v. Mr. K.S.Palanisami and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.N.Meenakshi v. Mr. K.S.Palanisami and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

R.Usha, Vs Director of Enforcement

Dr.S.Syed inayath Vs The Inspector General of Registration

Mittalal Vs the Registrar

R.Sangeetha Vs The Commissioner

A.S.Carriers (P) Ltd., Vs Dr.K.Senthil Raj, Ias.

S.Selvaraj Vs v.Dakshinamoorthy, Ias., and 2 another