In a contempt proceeding, the Court held that no demolition occurred under the challenged order; stopping construction was not a violation. Finding no willful breach, the Court dismissed the case without proceeding against the respondent.
The contempt case is dismissed.
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.
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN
CONTEMPT CASE No.151 of 2012
ORDER:
The order, violation of which has resulted in the present contempt case being filed, is the order of this Court in WPMP.No.25651 of 2011 in W.P.No.21070 of 2011 dated 10.08.2011, whereby this Court extended the earlier order passed on 27.07.2011 directing that no demolition be undertaken by the respondents.
In his counter affidavit, the Tahsildar, Keesara Mandal, Ranga Reddy District (respondent herein) would submit that he has not demolished the subject building but had only stopped the petitioner from commencing construction under the guise of the order of this Court.
As the order of this Court aforementioned has not been violated, much less wilfully and deliberately, I see no reason to proceed against the respondent under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
The Contempt Case is, accordingly, dismissed.
RAMESH RANGANATHAN,J
Date:05.03.2012 usd
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the respondent committed contempt by stopping construction violation of an order directing no demolition.
If an order was not violated deliberately, whether contempt procedure should proceed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Tahsildar, Keesara Mandal, Ranga Reddy District
RAMESH RANGANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
