Telangana High Court
CC/503/2016 of K.RAMU GOUD, MAHABOOBNAGAR DIST. Vs S. RAGHAVENDRA REDDY, NALGONDA DIST. on 29 December 2017
SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE NO.503 OF 2016 DATED:29-12-2017 Between: K. Ramu Goud … Petitioner And S. Raghavendra Reddy … Respondent COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: None appears COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms. B. Rachana THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING: CVNR, J
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY
CONTEMPT CASE NO.503 OF 2016
DATED:29-12-2017
Between:
K. Ramu Goud … Petitioner
And
S. Raghavendra Reddy … Respondent
COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER: None appears COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Ms. B. Rachana THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
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.
ORDER:
This contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dt.29.01.2016 in W.P. No.2537 of 2016.
At the hearing, there is no representation for the petitioner.
In the detailed counter affidavit filed by the respondent, it is inter alia stated that on 21.03.2016 the seized lorry in connection with which a direction was issued by this Court to consider its release by passing an appropriate order, was released under an order passed in respect thereto. No reply affidavit is filed controverting the said averment. As noted above, the counsel for the petitioner is not even present at the hearing.
Having regard to the uncontroverted averments in the counter affidavit as noted above, the contempt case is dismissed.
29-12-2017
__________________________
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
bnr