A contempt case where the petitioners were non-diligent in prosecuting after their counsel indicated no objection. The court dismissed the case due to this failure.
The contempt case is dismissed for non-prosecution. No costs.
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.
[3216 ]
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
TUESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. LAXMAN
CONTEMPT CASE No: 407 oI 2023
Contempt Case under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971, to punish the respondent herein for willfully and deliberately flouting the orders dated 02-08-2022 passed in S.A.No.1168 of2011.
Between:
Smt. Sathamma (died) per L.R.
...Petitioners/Petitioners
AND
Dundigal - Gandimaisamma t\4andal), I,4edchal - tvlalkejgiri District(formerly Ranga Red Jy District).
...Respondent ;/Reslrondents
lA NO: 1 OF 2023
Petition under Section 15'l CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant leave to the petitioners herein to bring the proposed respondents as party respondents i.e., respondents 17 to 22 in lhe present contempt case, in the interest ofjustice, pending disposal of the Contempt case.
Counsel for the Petitioners: SRl. M/s BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES(NOT PRESENT)
Counsel for the Respondents: None Appeared
The Court made the following: ORDER
I
TH O HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. LAXI{,,\N
()ONTEMPT CASE NO.4O7 OT 2023
ORDER:
l. On 07.0(i.2023 a representation n'as merd: ry learned counsel for the petitioners on record .e., ivl /s Bharadwaj Associates that they have alreadv given no objection val<alat.
t
\
//TRUECOPY//
SD/.|. NAIIA LAKstll'ill ,/ DEPUTY REGISTRAR rrEcnoN &rrcea
To,
'1. One CC to lil/s BHARADWAJ ASSOCIATES [OPIJC]
kam eJ-
ri
:
HIGH COURT
ML,J
DATED:05i0912023
,
"l
I )
,4
/;,+
, ..i
:
.) 1 t stP ?m
! A
?,,,..r,
ORDER
CC.No.407 of 2023
':
i::i t.
. THE CON'I'EMPT CASEiIS DISMIS$ED
FOR NON.I'ROSE CUTION
i
4V. )"'
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a contempt case should be allowed to proceed when the petitioners failed to file a fresh vakalat and were found to be non-diligent in prosecuting the case.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dr. C. Yadagiri
C. Rajalingam
Venkatram Rami Reddy
M. LAXMAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
