Court closed Contempt Case No. 373 of 2021 as the petitioner filed for withdrawal and the impugned order was already implemented. Pending miscellaneous applications in the case were also closed.
Contempt case closed; pending miscellaneous applications 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATEOF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWARA REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 373 OF 2021
Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 lo 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents herein for willfully violating, disobeying the Order of the High Court dated. 15J22020 passed in C.R.P.No.978 o'f 2020.
Between:
E.J. David, S/o. Late E.J. John, Aged about 61 years, Occupation.Business, Resident of H.No.1-2- 49/G1, Christian Colony, Mahboobnagar, Mahboobnagar District, Telangana State.
...Petitioner
AND
...Respondents/contem nors
lA NO: 1 OF 2021
Between:
E.J. David, S/o. Late E.J. John, Aged about 61 years, Occu pation. Business, Resident of H.No.1-2- 49/G1, Christian Colony, Mahboobnagar, Mahboobnagar District' Telanqana state
...petitioner/petitione r
AND
Petition under Order 10 of CPC R/w Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased may be pleased to implead the proposed Respondent No. 3 and 4 in the above Contempt Case pending disposal of the above Contempt Case.
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K. S. MURTHY
Counsel for the Respondents: THE AOVOCATE GENERAL (TG)
The Court made the following: ORDER
HONOUzu BLE SRI JUSTICE A.VENKATESHWAF'.AREDDY
CONTEMPT CASE No.373 of2O2l
ORDER:
Heai d learned counsel for thepetitioner,who has infact filed a letter eekingwithdrawal ofthe contemptcase. However, considering tl e representation ofthe learned counsel forthe petitioner to the effect that the orderincontemptcase is implemented, I rere is nopoint in continuing the contemptcase.
Accordin 3ly, the ContemptCase is closed, as the order is implemented. l'ending miscellaneousapplications,if anv, shall stand
closed.
SD/.M.VIJAYABHASKAR DT:PUTY REGISTRAR ,TRUE COPY' qD
SECTIONOFFICER
MMK
gbr
HIGH COURT
DATED: 1511212021
ORDER
$E :>l.ii
o+
t_)
21 Ji$l 2022
<i
CC.No.373 of 2121
CLOSING THEI)ONTEMPTCASE
a
)c,>l-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a contempt case should be closed if the underlying order is implemented and a withdrawal application is filed.
Whether proposed respondents should be impleaded if the main contempt petition is withdrawn.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
E.J. David
B. Sathish Kumar
G. Veera Reddy
Hanumantha Rao
Somesh Kumar
A. Venkateshwara Reddy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
