Andhra Pradesh High Court
CC/790/2026 of M.V. RANGASAI Vs CH. DINESH KUMAR on 18 August 2026
HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] WEDNESDAY, THE 19th DAY OF AUGUST 2026 PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CONTEMPT CASE NO: 790/2026 Between: 1. M.V. RANGASAI, ( DIED), 2. PRASANNA ANJALI DEVI, , D/O. LATE M. V. RANGASAI, (W/O. B.
APHC010080012026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY, THE 19th DAY OF AUGUST 2026
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N
CONTEMPT CASE NO: 790/2026
Between:
1. M.V. RANGASAI, ( DIED),
2. PRASANNA ANJALI DEVI, , D/O. LATE M. V. RANGASAI, (W/O. B.
KAMESWARA RAO) AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, OCC HOUSEWIFE, R/O. FLAT NO. 101, SREE NILAYAM HEMA NAGAR, BODUPPAL, K.V. RANGAREDDY, BODUPPAL, TELANGANA- 500092.
...PETITIONER(S)
AND
1. CH DINESH KUMAR, S/o. Late Kannama Naidu, Aged about 30 years, Occ Chief Executive Officer, in Karlam PACS, Cheepurapalli Mandal, Vizayanagaram District.
...CONTEMNOR
Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to pleased to punish the respondent, for his willful, deliberate and wanton violation of the Order dated 29.11.2024 passed in W.P.No. 18448 of 2011 by this Hon'ble Court Under Sections 10 to 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and pass Counsel for the Petitioner(S):
1. BINDU VEGIRAJU
Counsel for the Contemnor:
1.
The Court made the following:
CONTEMPT CASE No.790 of 2026
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:
There was no representation for the petitioner on 07.08.2026. Even today, when the matter was taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner.
Therefore, this contempt case is dismissed for non-prosecution. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.
____________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N
KGM
Whether the order is : Speaking Yes/No / Reasoned Yes/No Reportable Yes/No / Non-Reportable Yes/No
CONTEMPT CASE No.790 of 2026 Dated 19.08.2026
KGM