Allowed

B. Siddartha Reddy v. B. Venkatrajireddy

Telangana HC16 Feb 2023CA/18/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed a contempt appeal. The appellant was held guilty of contempt based on an order he claimed was invalid as the underlying civil suit was dismissed on 12.12.2022. The court set aside the earlier contempt order holding him guilty and allowed the appeal. The suit dismissal was confirmed on that date, invalidating the basis for the contempt charge.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 10.10.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in Contempt Case No. 2422 of 2018 was set aside, and the contempt appeal was allowed.

B. Siddartha Reddy Vs B. Venkatrajireddy — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶2

THURSDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THiEE

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN AND

¶5

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI

¶6

PT APP NO: 18 OF

¶7

contempt Appeat Under section 19 of the contempt court Act against the order dated 10-10-2022 in C.C.No. Z+zi ot ZO-ia on the fite of the High Court

¶8

Between:

¶9

B. Siddartha Reddv. S/o. Late Mr. VenkatrggOy. 4qgd, 37 years, Occupation Agriculture R/o Karkilpanao viirage'oi nmlngar rrrra,ioar,i,lana[ubnagar District, T.s.

¶10

.APPELLANT / RESPONDENT

¶11

AND

¶12

B' Venkatrajireddy, S/o. Mr. B. Sudhakar Reddy and smt. Anasuyamma, Aged about s2 vears, occuoatior Asricurture Rv; rurk;L;h,i mia;:i8i Amansar Mandal, Mahabbubnagar Distridt.

¶13

Gunna Malini Devi,.W/_o.Mr. Ramesh Reddy Aged 46 years, Occupation . Housewife R/o H. No. 17-1-38,lcis, vinivnagar corony Santoshnagar, Hyderabad. .. n'eipo,ioerits/petitioh;;'--

¶14

3' B' Venkat Reddv. !/g Lgte Mr. Janardhanreddy_R/o Karkarpahad virage of Amansat Mand^jr' Ma nrb, bn js;DGil;i, i. 5. (rjili j'",,.-,"-',o

¶15

...RESPONDENT/ Respondent

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2022

¶17

Petition under Section 151 .CPC praying that in the circurnstances stated in the affidavit fited in support of the petition, the irisi c;r;i ;;y bJi["r"0 to suspend the operation of the order passed by the rearned iingte irJGi^ c;riempt case No.2422 of 2018 dated. 10-10'2022., penoing disposat oitli Ci"t"mpt ippeat in the interest of justice.

¶18

Counsel for the Appeilant: SRt. MOHD. NASEERUDDTN

¶19

Counselfor Respondents 1 & 2: SRI K. SREENIVAS

¶20

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶21

THE N'BLE THE CHIEF UJJAL

t t

I I I I i

AND

THE HON'BLE SRI^{JUSTICEN. TUKARAMJI}

¶27

CONTEMPT APPEAL^{No.18 of 2O22}

¶28

-{qpgUENTr^{perthe Hon'bte the chief JustbeUjiatBhusanl}

¶29

Heard Mr. Mohd.^{Naseeruddin,learned counsel for}

¶30

the appellant.

¶31

On 14.11.2022 we had^{passedthe follorn'ing order:}

¶32

This appeal has been^{preferred under Section19} of the Contempt of Courts^{Act, L971, against the order} dated lO.lO.2O22^{passedby the learnedSingleJudge in} Contempt Case No.2422^of.2018.

¶33

By *re aforesaid order, appellant,^{who was} respondent No.2 in the^{contemptcase, was found guilty} of committing contempt of^{order dated 22.06-2012} passed in A.S.M.P.No.12O0 of 2Ol2^{in A-S.No.372 of} 2012 as confirmed and continued^{vide order dated} 06.03.2O 14 and sentenced to^{undergo civil} imprisonment for three^months.

¶34

¶35

Let the appeal be admitted.

¶36

Appellant to serve the respondents^{through the} Court process as well as^{through personalservice and} thereafter file^{proof of service.}

¶37

In the meanwhile, there shall^{be suspensionof} the order dated LO.lO.2022^{passed by the learnedSingle} Judge in Contempt Case No.2422 of^2018.

¶38

. List on 16.O2.2O23.

¶39

¶40

Learned counsel for the appellant submits^that appellant was found guilty of committing^{contemptof order} dated 22.06.2012 passed in^{A.S.M.P.No.l2OO} of^{2012 in} A.S.No.372 of 2012. He submits that^{A.S.No.372of 2Ol2} was d.ismissed. on 12.12.2022 by^{confirming the judgment} and decree dated O9.O4.2O12^passed by^{the trial Courtin} O.S.No.250 of 2OO7^.

¶41

That being the position, we set aside the order dated IO.lO.2022 passed by the learned Single Judgeⁱⁿ C.C.No.2422 of 2018.

¶42

Accordingly, contempt appeal is allowed.

¶43

Miscellaneous applications pending, if &fly, shall

¶44

stand closed.

¶45

Sd/.B.S.CHIRANJEEVI JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY//

I It il

SECTION OFFIGER

One CC to SRl. MOHD NASEER UDDIN, Advocate [OPUC] 2. One CC to Sri K.Sreenivas, Advocate [OPUC]

¶51

Two CD Copies

HIGH COURT

DATED:1 610212023

ORDER

CONTEMPT APPEAL .No.18 of 2022

¶57

'ihiE S14
(
h. '<br>,i -) 20 I{AR2023
{ ,., r::.!..,. f . . . , |':- .J

¶58

ALLOWING THE CONTEMPT APPEAL

B. Siddartha Reddy v. B. Venkatrajireddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

B. Siddartha Reddy v. B. Venkatrajireddy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S.Mallikarjuna Rice Industries Vs the Income Tax Officer

M/S.Mallikarjuna Rice Industries Vs the Income Tax Officer

M/S Nova Medicare , Hyd. Vs the Income Tax Officer, Hyd.

Smt. Daiva Krupa Vs Smt. B. Chandrakala and 5 Others

B. Siddartha Reddy Vs B. Anasuyamma

The National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. (Nsic) Vs The State of Telangana