Telangana High Court
CC/1293/2019 of Smt.Anita Bai Vs M. Muthyarn Reddy and 4 others on 31 December 2021
THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1293 OF 2019 Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondents for their willfull disobedience of the Orders of the
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANAAT HYDERABAD
FRIDAY,THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBERTWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P NAVEEN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 1293 OF 2019
Contempt Case filed Under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act topunish the respondents for their willfull disobedience of the Orders of the High Courtmade in W.P.M.P.No.35452 of 2017 in W.P.No.28502 ot 2017 daled 24.08.2017.
Between:
Smt.Anita Bai, D/o. late Avad Biharilal Age 34 years, Occ. House wife,R/o.H.No. 14-2-150/A, Chandanwadi, Hyderabad. Rep. by her GPA holder Sri. Mohd lmam, S/o ShekBashu I\/iya, aged about 53 years, Occ.Business, Rlo 41-8212711, Sdullh Nagr, l\,4oulali,Hyderabad .,.PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1 5AND
1. M. Ir,/uthyam Reddy, S/o.Late laxma Reddy, Aged about 76 years, Occ.Business, R/o H.No. 1-1811111, Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.Business, R/o H.No. 1-1811111, Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.2. [v]. Veera Reddy S/o late late laxma Reddy, Aged about 66 [years, ]Occ. Business,R/o H.No. 1-18ll1l1,Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.R/o H.No. 1-18ll1l1,Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.
3. M. Chandra Reddy S/o late laxma Reddy, Age. 62 years, Occ. Business, Rl/oH.No. 1-18/1 1/1, Sriramangar Colony, Alvval, Secunderabad.H.No. 1-18/1 1/1, Sriramangar Colony, Alvval, Secunderabad.
4. M. Narayana Reddy, S/o.Late laxma Reddy, Age. 60 years, Occ. Business, R/oH.No. 1-18/1 1/1 , Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.H.No. 1-18/1 1/1 , Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.
5. M. Krishna Reddy, S/o.late laxma Reddy, Aged about 53 years, Occ. Business,R!/o H.No. 1-1811111, Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.R!/o H.No. 1-1811111, Sriramangar Colony, Alwal, Secunderabad.
...CONTEMNORS/wRIT PETITIONERS
Counsel for the Petitioner : SRl. SRINIVASA RAO PUTLURI
Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 : SRI K.RAGHUVEER REDDY
The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P. NAVEEN RAO
CONTEMPT CASE No. 1293 of 2OL9
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER:
Heard learned counsel for petitioner Sri P Srinivas Rao and learnedcounsel for respondents 1 to 5 Sri K Raghuveer Reddy.
2. This contempt case is Iiled alleging that respondents haveviolated the directions issued by this Court in WPMP No. 35452 of 2Ol7in WP No. 28502 of 2017 dated 24.8.2017. This Court taking note of thefact that very same order of the Tahsildar dated 7.O 1 .2O 15 wassuspended by this Court by order dated 21.A.2O17 in WPMP No. 34378of 2Ol7 in WP No. 27678 of 2017, granted interim suspension as prayedfor. However, it was further observed that any decision taken bypetitioners shall abide the result of the writ petition. Alleging that saidinterim orders are violated, this contempt case is filed.
3. Petitioner herein who is respondJnt no. 15 in the writ petitionalleges that respondents herein/writ petitioners have erected sign boardsstating [uplots ]for sale", that the character of the land was changed anddivided into parts and leased out to third party and third party wasinducted into possession to carry on business by making temporaryconstructions.
4. Even if what is stated by petitioner is correct, looking at theorder passed by this Court, there was no such restriction imposed.This Court only observed that any action taken by petitioners thereinwould abide the result of the writ petition. Therefore, what is allegeddoes not amount to committing contempt of the orders of this Courtwarranting interference of this Court. Accordingly, contempt case is closed. Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, are closed SD/.M.VIJAYA BHASKARDEPUTY REGISTRAR
//TRUE COPY//
,.tL,:.
SECTION OFFICER
To
1. One CC to Sri Srinivas Rao Putluri, Advocate (OPUC)
2. One CC to Sri K.Raghuveer Reddy, Advocate (OPUC)3. Two CD Copies4. One Spare Copyks3. Two CD Copies4. One Spare Copyks DATED:3111212021
ORAL ORDER:S-!4g5rAtEC.C.No.1293 of 201931 [J$l ][?'fJ2]
CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASEWITHOUT COSTS