Dismissed

Duggempudi Ravinder Reddy v. State of Telagana

Telangana HC1 Jul 2022CC/558/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court closed a contempt case filed for alleged disobedience of market value fixation orders, noting that the respondents had produced proceedings fixing the market value. The court stated the petitioner may file a miscellaneous petition if dissatisfied with the compliance.

What did the court decide?

The contempt case was closed and dismissed as the orders were found to be complied with.

Duggempudi Ravinder Reddy Vs State of… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Telangana HC (2022)

r:'t. i

I I i

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶5

FRIDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY TWO

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO

¶8

CONTEMPTCASE NO: 5s8OF 2022 ,.ir"r. . ' 'J :rirri , ;i i'l r; ^ ' \-u ntempt Case Under Sbction 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the Rcspo ndent herein'forr Willfully violating, the Order of the High Court dated - .),. l'l;'r",tr' .;.i3 06-08-202 1 in W.P.No.17544ot2021 )

¶9

:;!r.t.' ) a':, ; !'J;,: -,1{.;.- :.,

¶10

Between:

¶11

'L', ;j:. . .....

¶12

Duggempudi Ravinder Reddy, S/o Koti Reddy, Age.56 years, Occ.Agriculture, R/o, H.No. 1-3-14, Shanthinagar, Peddapally Town and District.

¶13

...PETITIONER

¶14

AND

¶15

Dr.S.Sangeetha, The District Collector Peddapally District, Peddapally 2. R.V. Karnam, The District Registrar (MV and Audit) Karimnagar District, " Karimnagar.

¶16

... RESPONDENTS

¶17

Co SE I for the IAVANI REDDY Counsel for the en FORREVENUE Thei Court made the followingl ORDER '.|., ,. , . :1,l

\ \

t T

HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

¶22

CONTEMPT CASE No.558 of2022

¶23

ORDER:

¶24

Heard Sri Chinthalaphani Avani Reddy, iearned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue, appearing for respondents.

¶25

This contempt is filed alle5;ing u,ilful and deliberate disobedience of the orders of this Court in W.P.No. i7544 of 2O2l dated 06.08.2O21.

¶26

3.i,.^j'Learned counsei for the petitioner sought to ., , conteud- that sofar, the exercise of dctermination cf revenue on market value is not undertaken by the respondents.

¶27

l,earned Government Plcader^produced a copy of the proceedings No.MV/S16612A22 clated 23.05.2O22 fixing the basic market value at Rs.4,5O,OO0/- per acre.

¶28

In view thereof, the orders of this Court are complied and accordingly, the Conternpt Casc is closed. However, it is needless to obscn c that rf^petitioner is not satisfied with the compliance, it is open to the petitroner to avail

¶29

-3

¶30

appropriate^{remedy as availablcin larv' Miscellaneouspetitions'}

¶31

if any, Pending^{shall stand closed'}

¶32

AM .VIJAYA BHASKAR JOINT REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPYII

6i--SECTION OFFICER

2:t

Two CD Copies

¶37

One Spare Copy

¶38

e [OPUC] of Telangana at

Kul gbr

HIGH COURT

l,lt[/'

1
I 0712022

t.:.

I
/(
{ [5
<br>

No.558 of 2022

,f,

CTOSING THE coNTEMPT CASE

Duggempudi Ravinder Reddy v. State of Telagana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Duggempudi Ravinder Reddy v. State of Telagana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Usha Rani Vs Sri. Sandeep Sultania and 2 others

Shaik Rafi Ahmed Vs Shri Sunil Dutt

J.Venkataiah Vs M.Vasuchandra

Guda Lakshmi Lalithya Vs S. Sandeep

M/s.Om Prakash Jewellers and Pearls Vs Mrs.Uma Bung Bagri

IskaAkshara Vs S.Ravichandra Reddy