Contempt case filed for ignoring High Court order to acquire land. Court found respondent initiated proceedings. Case disposed, allowing approach if acquisition not completed in two months.
Dismissed with liberty to approach court if land acquisition not completed within two months.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD
THURSDAY, THE SIXTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE NO : 836 of 2009
(Contempt Case U/s. 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the Respondents herein for violating, disobeying the Order of the High Court dated 3-11-2008 in WP No.3070 of 2002.
Between:
E Appa Rao S/o late Sri E Narayana Rao R/o Narasampet Village Narasampet Mandal, Warangal District
..... PETITIONER
AND
.....RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR.DANTU.SRINIVAS
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR LAND ACQUISITION
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order dated 3-11-2008 in Writ Petition No.3070 of 2002.
At the hearing, the contemnor-respondent No.2 is present. The learned Government Pleader for Land Acquisition placed before me memo dated 31-7-2009 along with draft notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) approved by the District Collector, Warangal, wherein the extent of Ac.5.00 guntas belonging to the petitioner is proposed to be acquired as directed by this Court in the above-mentioned order passed in Writ Petition No.3070 of 2002.
After hearing Sri D.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that since respondent No.2 has taken remedial steps by withdrawing the previous memo, which allegedly violated the order of this Court, and also by initiating the proceedings under the Act, the cause in the Contempt Case does not survive for consideration.
The Contempt Case is accordingly closed with liberty to the petitioner to approach this Court if the land acquisition proceedings are not completed within a period of two months from today.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
Date:06-8-2009 MNR
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the contempt case survives given the respondent's compliance with the High Court order through initiating land acquisition proceedings.
Whether liberty to approach the Court should be granted if land acquisition proceedings are not completed within two months.
Whether the trial court should dismiss the contempt petition after taking notice of remedial steps.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
E Appa Rao
K Shiva Reddy
C.V.Nagarajuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
