Disposed

Pottabattina Ravi v. N. Balaji

Telangana HC24 Feb 2023CC/12/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a contempt case under the Contempt of Courts Act seeking punishment for violation of a High Court order. The respondent stated compliance via speaking orders. Court rejected the petitioner's contention and closed the case without costs, allowing the petitioner to challenge the speaking orders in the appropriate forum.

What did the court decide?

Contempt case closed without costs. No order as to costs.

Pottabattina Ravi Vs N. Balaji — Contempt of Court | Telangana HC (2023)

¶1

[³²³⁰¹

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE^{OF TELANGANA} AT HYDERABAD

¶3

FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF^FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND^{TWENTY THREE}

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA^KANNEGANTI

¶6

CONTEMPT CASE NO: 12 OF 2023

¶7

Contempt Case Under Sections^'10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act^to punish the Respondent herein for, willfully violating, the Order of the High Court dated 06-04-2022 passed in Writ Petition No^'1 7312 ol 2022.

¶8

Between:

¶9

Pottabattina Ravi, S/o Bhadraiah, Aged about 40^years, Occ: Business, r/o 17-240, Cheemla Gadda Nakrekal Village and Mandal, Nalgonda District.

¶10

...PETITIONER/WRIT PETITIONER

¶11

AND

¶12

N. Balaji, S/o not known to petitioner, Aged about 50 years, Commissioner Nakrekal Municipality, Nalgonda District.

¶13

(The other Respondent in W.P. i.e. Respondent NoS.1 and 3 are not Necessary party)

¶14

...RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT No.2 lN WP

¶15

Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI K.UPENDER REDDY

¶16

Counsel for the Respondent No.1 (SR): SRI B.JAGAN MADHAVA RAO

¶17

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶18

I I

¶19

¶20

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI

¶21

CONTEMPT CASE No.12 of 2o23

¶22

ORDER:

¶23

The Contempt Case is hled seeking the following reliet

¶24

"... to punish the .espondent/contemnor under Sections lO to 12 of the Contempt of courts Act, r971 for willfut disobedience of the orderof this Hon,bre court passed b}her L.adyship Smt. Justice Lalitha Kanneganti in Writ petition No.173Ii ot 2022 daled 06.O4 .2022 and . .. . " .

¶25

2- This contempt case is filed for violation of the orders passed by this court, u'hereby this court has directed the respondents to consider the repr( scnlitlion of the petitioner.

¶26

A counter afhd.vit has been filed by the respondent stating that they have considercd the representation and passed speaking orders on ll.Ol.2023 and in view of the same, orders of this court are complied_

¶27

Learned counscl for the petitioner submits that the respondents without doing any enquiry, based on some fabricated dircuments have passed the speaking orders. According to him, the orders passed by this court are not complied with.

¶28

This court is not able to appreciate the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. The respondents have passed the order pursuant to the orders passed by this court. If the said order is passed by the respondents on the grounds as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is always open for the petitioner to question the said order.

! I I I I

Accordingly, the contempt case is closed giving libcrtl, to the petitioner to question the orders passed by the respondents, if he is aggrievcd so. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

The miscellaneous applications, if any shaJl stand automatically closed.

¶34

SD/. M. MANJULA DEPUry REGISTRAR

//TRUE COPY//

SECTION OFFICER

1 Sri N.Balaji S/o Not know petitioner Aged about 50 years, Commissioners, Nakrekal Municipality, Nalqonda Dist."^--v*vv 'vqrr 32 One CC to SRt 9n" 99^{to SRt} B.JAGAN^K.UpENoeq I\TADHAVA'RAb, 5.q9.gi,3ovocate AOr.l.-rt""t6pUCt[opUCl 4 Two CD Copies

PSK.

HIGH COURT

DATED:2410212023

ORDER

:----
I t.r 2 $ [Pn tt?s

¶46

CC.No.12 of 2023

¶47

CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE WITHOUT COSTS.

Pottabattina Ravi v. N. Balaji

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pottabattina Ravi v. N. Balaji

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

United India Insurance Company Limited Vs Rahmathunnisa Begum , Hameeda Begum and 7 Others

The National Insurance Company Limited Vs Gorla Mysaiah , Mysulu and 4 Others

The National Insurance Company Ltd., Vs Avula Kalamma and 5 Others

Smt.Akula Narmada Vs Smt. S. Pankaja

Lankala Krishna Reddy Vs P Mohan Reddy

Chouhan Mahadev Vs Sri. Ayaz