Vangala Jyothsna v. Smt Nagaveni W/o Petitioner not known
Case brief
What is this about?
The Court held that owing to a compliance order dated 19.5.2010 passed by the 1st respondent, the petitioner's allegations of contempt are unfounded. Consequently, the contempt case was closed without further enquiry.
What did the court decide?
The contempt case is closed. No costs. The petitioner may challenge the dated 19.5.2010 order by working out available legal remedies.
What the court decided
THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH:: HYDERABAD
PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI
CONTEMPT CASE NO:956 OF 2009
DATED:17.02.2012
BETWEEN:
VANGALA JYOSTHANA
…PETITIONER
AND
SMT NAGAVENI & ANOTHER
…RESPONDENTS.
THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE G.ROHINI
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the allegations of contempt of court against the respondents are founded in view of their compliance order.
Whether further enquiry is necessary into the contempt allegations.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
VANGALA JYOSTHANA
- respondent
SMT NAGAVENI
- respondent
ANOTHER
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · February
- Registered
- Case no.
- CC/956/2009
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court