In this contempt case filed for violating directions in W.P.No.17817 of 2009, the petitioner claimed VAT refund. The court noted the respondents had refused the claim but subsequently refunded it after the petition was filed. Finding no prejudice, the court closed the case without costs.
Contempt proceedings closed; no costs awarded.
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.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R. SUBHASH REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.1452 of 2010
ORDER:
1 This Contempt Case is filed alleging violation of the directions issued by this Court in W.P.No.17817 of 2009 dated 25.09.2009. The said Writ Petition is allowed in terms of the earlier order passed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.14026 of 2009 dated 22.07.2009.
2 In the order passed in W.P.No.14026 of 2009 dated 22.07.2009, this court permitted the petitioner to make an application to the respondents to consider its claim for payment of the amount, which was claimed by it towards VAT component.
3 When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Pleader submitted that after filing of the present Contempt Cast, the respondents have considered the claim of the petitioner and have also refunded the amount due to the petitioner.
4 In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a fit case to proceed further against the respondents under the provisions of the Contempt of
Courts Act, 1971.
-------------------------R.Subhash Reddy, J. 19.12.2011 Kvsn
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to proceed with contempt proceedings after the respondent refunded the claimed VAT amount.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondents
R. Subhash Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
