Dismissed

S. Shyam Sunder Reddy v. R.Y. Venumadhava Rao and another

Telangana HC5 Dec 2022CC/440/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a petition under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act seeking punishment for violation of a 2017 order, noting respondents had complied. The court closed the case, discharged respondents, and dismissed pending Miscellaneous Petitions without costs.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed, respondents discharged, miscellaneous petitions dismissed, no costs awarded.

S. Shyam Sunder Reddy Vs R.Y. Venumadhava Rao and another — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

MONDAY. THE FIFTH DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR

¶5

CONTEMPT GASE NO: 440 OF 2021

¶6

Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the Respondent herein gross and willful violation of the orders of the High Court daled 27-12-2017 in W.P.No. 44536 of 2017.

¶7

Between:

¶8

S. Shyam Sunder Reddy, S/ o. S. Vittal Reddy, Aged about 37 years, Occ: Agriculture, R/ o. Yenkepally Village, Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶9

...Contem pt Petitioner/Petitioner

¶10

AND

¶11

'1. R.Y. Venumadhava Rao, The Revnue Divisional Officer, Chevella Division, Ranga Reddy District

¶12

M. Sharmila, The Mandal Revenue Officer Tahsildar Chevella Mandal, Ranga Reddy District

¶13

(R-2 is discharge from the Contempt Proceedings as per the Court order dated 13-09-2022)

¶14

Sri. Amoy Kumar,, District Collector and Magistrate, Ranga Reddy District. (R3 impleaded as per the Hon'ble Court Order did.13.09.2022 in lA No.1/2022 in CC No.440 of 2021)

¶15

...Contemnors/Respondents

¶16

Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. AVINASH DESAI

¶17

Counsel for the Respondents: GP FOR REVENUE

¶18

R-2 is Discharged from the Contempt Proceedings as^per C.O. dated^13-09-022

¶19

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶20

¶21

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDTIEER KUMAR CoNTEMPT CASE No.44O of2O2l

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

It is r'prcsentccl b1, Sri Avinash Desai, Jca'-:d counsel for thc 1;c titiorrt r that thc respondcnts have cornpliecL rr,ith the order lrzissrtl^{bv tl rs Court in W.P.No.4.1536 of 2017, dat:} I^{27 .12.2O17.}

¶24

rr r",ieu, of thc same, the Conterrpt Cz l;:: is closed and

¶25

thc r( sJ)(,l](l, nts arc discharged.

¶26

Misccllancous f]etitions, il any, pcnding ill this contempt r:asc shall slarrd closcd. There shall be no orde:: al lo costs

¶27

{i:^t- K. SRINIVAS RAO JOINT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

To,

R.Y. Venumr dhava Rao, The Revnue Divisional Officer 3hevella Division, Ranga Redd^/ District.

¶34

Shri, Amoy K umar,, District Collector and Magistrate, F attga Reddy District. (R3 impleadt d as per the Hon'ble Court Order dtd.13.0!1 2022 in lA No.1/2022 in CC No.44(' of 2021)

¶35

One CC to t ri. AVINASH DESAI, Advocate [OPUC]

¶36

Two CCs to the GOVT. PLEADER FOR REVENUE. Hicl Court for the State of Telangane . [OUT]

¶37

Two CD Cop es

PSR

$rl.

HIGH COUR T MSK,J

DATED:0511212022

LA
/i 1
(i <7
( t
) s oul
ir
o
=
:i +J
\ i) .<br>V,., t'
....:
) Il

¶43

ORDER

¶44

CC.No.440 cf 2421

¶45

CLOSING TIIE CONTEMPT CASE WITHOUT C )STS.

¶46

\2
A-,
<.

S. Shyam Sunder Reddy v. R.Y. Venumadhava Rao and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Shyam Sunder Reddy v. R.Y. Venumadhava Rao and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Weldflux India Limited Vs The State of Telangana and 4 others

Kala Praful Jain Vs The Government of Andhra Pradesh

K.Surender Goud Vs The State of Telangana

Y. Narayan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana

Gangasani Sudarshan Reddy Vs The State of Telangana