M/s M.R. Publicities, v. Sri K. Ramesh
Case brief
What is this about?
In a filed-down contempt case regarding wilful disobedience of High Court orders, the Court noted the absence of petitioner's counsel on listing days. As no representation appeared, the Court closed the case without costs.
What did the court decide?
the Contempt Case is closed. No costs.
What the court decided
A compact analysis
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.
I
[3296 I
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY,THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE C,V. BHASKAR REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 220 OF 2014
Contempt Case Under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to Punish the Respondents herein for violating, disobeying the Orders of the High Court dated 09.05.2013 in W.P.tr/.P.No.17483 ot 2013 in W.P.No.14354 o'f 2013.
Between:
It//s M.R. Publicities, Outdoor Advertisement rep by lts Managing Director, Sri T. Tirupathi Rao, Having its regd. office at Plot No.61, Asbestos colony, Karkhana, Secunderabad.
...PETITIONER
AND
Issues for consideration
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the contempt petition should be allowed to proceed in the absence of petitioner's counsel.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
M.R. Publicities, OutdoorAdvertisement rep by Sri T. Tirupathi Rao
- respondent
Sri K. Ramesh
Coram
C.V. BHASKAR REDDY
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
- Court
- Telangana HC
- Decided on
- · January
- Registered
- Case no.
- CC/220/2014
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court