Petitioner sought to withdraw a contempt case claiming the contemnor had expired. The Court granted permission to withdraw the case with liberty to file appropriate proceedings.
Claim dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file appropriate proceedings.
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
FRIDAY, THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TEN
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
CONTEMPT CASE No.760 of 2010
(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 10.03.2006 in ASMP.No.1947 of 2005 in AS.No.2252 of 2003.)
BETWEEN:
Singavaram Ram Singh.
... PETITIONER
AND
Singavaram Ganapathi Singh and two others.
...RESPONDENTS
Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. M.V.S. SURESH KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondents: --NONE APPEARED--
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the contemnor has
expired and seeks permission to withdraw the contempt case with liberty to file appropriate proceedings in accordance with law.
2. Permission is accorded.
The contempt case is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty. There shall be no order as to costs.
_____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J August 13, 2010 DSK
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Singavaram Ram Singh
Singavaram Ganapathi Singh
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
