This court closed a contempt case alleging willful disobedience of an order because parties submitted at the hearing that possession proposals were dropped and the petitioner was permitted to harvest usufruct.
The contempt case is closed.
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 C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE No.493 of 2014
Dated: 06.06.2014
Between: B. Madhavi .. Petitioner and Mr. K. Hanumatha Rao .. Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. M.M.M. Srinivas For Mr. Kowturu Vinaya Kumar Counsel for the Respondent: Mr. G. Elisha
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This contempt case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order dated 03.04.2013 in W.P.M.P.No.12495 of 2013 in W.P.No.10044 of 2013.
At the hearing, the learned counsel for both parties submitted that after filing of the contempt case, the proposals for taking possession of the property from the petitioner have been dropped and that the petitioner is permitted to harvest the usufruct.
In view of the above submission of the learned counsel, the contempt case is closed.
C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 6th June, 2014 IBL
B. Madhavi
Mr. K. Hanumatha Rao
C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
