Allowed

Bilquis Jahan W/o Mohammed Mohsin Bin Qureshi v. Mohammed abdul Sattar , Mohammed Haji

Telangana HC7 Jul 2011CC/482/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court in a contempt proceeding regarding violation of an undertaking to vacate premises directed the respondents to vacate the property within seven days and sought police assistance.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondents to vacate premises and hand over possession within seven days; trial court to issue warrant for delivery in aid of execution.

Bilquis Jahan W/o Mohammed Mohsin Bin… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2011)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO

¶2

CONTEMPT CASE No. 482 of 2011.

¶3

ORDER:

¶4

I have heard the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner. Though notices have been served on the respondents by special messenger, they did not appear either in person or through a counsel.

¶5

This contempt case is filed alleging wilful violation of the undertaking furnished by the petitioners in C.R.P.No. 2293 of 2010. The order passed by the learned single Judge of this Court in C.R.P.No. 2293 of 2010 reveals that the petitioners in the revision petition (the respondents in this contempt case) furnished an undertaking affidavit in USR No. 734/2010 stating that they would vacate the petition schedule premises and hand over the vacant possession of the same to the landlord (the petitioner herein) in 12 months, the learned single Judge dismissed the C.R.P. by granting time upto 31.12.2010 to vacate and handover the vacant possession of the petition schedule premises. The grievance of the petitioner herein is that the respondents did not vacate the premises even after 31.12.2010 as directed by the learned single Judge or even after 12 months period sought by them in their undertaking affidavit.

¶6

The conduct of the respondents in flouting the undertaking furnished by them before the learned single Judge of this Court in the C.R.P.No. 2293 of 2010 clearly amounts to contempt of court. Therefore, the respondents herein are directed to vacate the petition schedule property and hand over the possession of the same to the landlord/petitioner within a period of seven days from today. Otherwise petitioner is entitled to get the premises vacated by taking assistance of police force. The trial court i.e. 3^rd Additional Rent Controller, Hyderbad is directed to issue a warrant for delivery of possession of the petition schedule property and shall also direct the

¶7

police concerned to render assistance in getting the petition schedule property vacated.

¶8

With the above direction, the contempt case is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶9

________________________ R.KANTHA RAO, J 07.07.2011. KRB.

¶10

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.KANTHA RAO

¶11

CONTEMPT CASE No. 482 of 2011.

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

Dt. 07.07.2011.

Bilquis Jahan W/o Mohammed Mohsin Bin Qureshi v. Mohammed abdul Sattar , Mohammed Haji

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bilquis Jahan W/o Mohammed Mohsin Bin Qureshi v. Mohammed abdul Sattar , Mohammed Haji

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Munichenchurama Pillai Vs K.Saraswathi

M.Sarwar Vs Mohd Muneeruddin

S. Babjan Vs The District Collector / District Project

Jolapalem Siddappa Naidu Vs Apsrtc

Vadde P. v. Subbarayudu Vs Kopparapu Rama Subbaiah (diedd) By L.Rs.

Mohd. Waheeduddin, Vs Smt. G. Eramma