Dismissed¶21

Sofa Manufacturing v. Vinoth Kumar

Madras HC27 Jan 2026CONT P/32/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, Cont.P.No.32 of 2026, order dated 27.01.2026 by Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava with G. Arul Murugan, J.: contempt petition by Sofa Manufacturing (partnership firm, rep. S. Anwar Basha) against Vinoth Kumar, Authorised Officer, ICICI Bank Ltd., dismissed as misconceived; no contempt lies once the authority has decided the objection in compliance of the Court's earlier order in W.P.No.30337 of 2025 dated 06.10.2025; petitioner free to challenge that decision on merits; no costs.

What did the court decide?

None; petition dismissed with liberty reserved to the petitioner to assail the correctness and validity of the decision on its objection, and no order as to costs. ¶21

Sofa Manufacturing Vs Vinoth Kumar — Contempt of Court | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

Cont.P.No.32 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 27.01.2026

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

¶7

Contempt Petition No.32 of 2026

¶8

Sofa Manufacturing a Registered Partnership Firm Having its Office at No.44, T H Road Chinandimadam, Kodungaiyur Chennai- 600 118 Rep. by its Partner S.Anwar Basha.

¶9

Petitioner

¶10

¶11

Vinoth Kumar Authorised Officer ICICI Bank Ltd 3rd Floor, No.1, Cenotaph Road, Teynampet, Chennai-600 018

¶12

Respondent

¶13

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for her willful disobedience to the order dated 06.10.2025 passed by this Court in W.P.No.30337 of 2025 and punish her accordingly.

¶14

_______________ Page 1 of 4_

¶15

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

¶16

Cont.P.No.32 of 2026

¶17

ORDER (Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶18

Heard.

¶19

Without challenging the correctness and validity of a decision taken in compliance of the order of this Court, this contempt petition has been filed alleging willful disobedience of the order dated 06.10.2025 passed in W.P.No.30337 of 2025.

¶20

A perusal of the order passed by us would show that, without expressing any opinion on merits of the matter, this Court had directed the authority to decide the petitioner’s objection. Once the objection has been decided, irrespective of the correctness thereof, no contempt could be initiated.

¶21

The contempt petition is misconceived and the same is dismissed. However, this order shall not come in the way of the petitioner in assailing the correctness and validity of the decision on the petitioner’s objection.

¶22

_______________ Page 2 of 4_

¶23

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

¶24

Cont.P.No.32 of 2026

¶25

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶26

(MANINDRA MOHAN SHRIVASTAVA, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J) 27.01.2026 Index : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No bbr

¶27

_______________ Page 3 of 4_