Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

B Ramesh vs Sri Hiralal Samariya

High Court Of Telangana|11 July, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (SPECIAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION) FRIDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND FOURTEEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR AND THE HON’BLR SRI JUSTICE S. RAVI KUMAR CONTEMPT CASE No.698 of 2014 BETWEEN B. Ramesh.
…PETITIONER AND Sri Hiralal Samariya, IAS, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Hyderabad and another.
…RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner: MR. D. LINGA RAO Counsel for the Respondents: --NONE APPEARED-- The Court made the following order:
ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Vilas V. Afzulpurkar) This contempt case is filed alleging disobedience of the interim orders of this court in WPMP.No.2195 of 2010 in WP.No.1651 of 2010 dated 01.02.2010.
2. The affidavit filed by the petitioner shows that notional benefits were conferred on the third respondent in the writ petition on 10.08.2010 contrary to the aforesaid interim orders. However, the present contempt case is filed only on 17.04.2014. Keeping in view the date of the aforesaid order and the date of filing of the contempt case, the present case is clearly beyond the mandate of Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that another OA was pending before the tribunal where there was interim order and as such, till the disposal of the said OA on 29.01.2014, the petitioner could not have moved the present contempt case. Learned counsel also submits that the order of the tribunal dated 29.01.2014 was suspended by this Court in WPMP.No.9172 of 2014 in WP.No.7394 of 2014 dated 15.04.2014.
4. Even if that be so, we do not see any justification for the petitioner to move the present contempt case within the limitation available under Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain the contempt case, as in our view it is barred by Section 20 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
The contempt case is accordingly dismissed. The miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J S. RAVI KUMAR, J July 11, 2014 DSK
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

B Ramesh vs Sri Hiralal Samariya

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
11 July, 2014
Judges
  • Vilas V Afzulpurkar
  • S Ravi Kumar
Advocates
  • Mr D Linga Rao