K.S.N.Raju v. Sri.D.Damodar
Case brief
What is this about?
Court dismissed a contempt proceeding where the respondent deposited the required costs via a demand draft. Petitions pending in the matter were closed.
What did the court decide?
Closed the contempt case and dismissed proceedings against the respondent for non-payment of costs after deposit of the amount.
What the court decided
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
CC.No.793 of 2017
ORDER :
Heard the counsel for petitioner, and Sri G. Bhaskar, for respondent.
2. This Contempt Case is filed alleging non-payment of costs as directed by this Court in the order dt.10.03.2016 in WP.No.7729 of 2016.
3. Sri G. Bhakar, counsel for respondent, has handed over to the counsel for petitioner a Demand Draft for a sum of Rs.2,000/representing the costs directed to be paid by the respondent to the petitioner.
4. Therefore, I do not see any reason to punish the respondent for Contempt of Court.
5. Therefore, the Contempt Case is closed.
6. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this Contempt Case, shall stand closed.
__________________________________ JUSTICE M.S.RAMACHANDRA RAO
Date: 09-06-2017 Ndr/*
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to punish the respondent for non-payment of costs directed by the court.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Respondent
Coram
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · June
- Registered
- Case no.
- CC/793/2017
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court