IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 10.02.2017 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN Cont. P.No.240 of 2017 The Egmore Benefit Society Ltd rep. by its Secretary /Receiver U.Ramanathan ... Petitioner Vs Mr.Pandian Sub Inspector of Police, (Law & Order) E1, Mylapore Police Station, Chennai – 600 004. ... Respondent Contempt petition has been filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent for wilfully and wantonly disobeying the order dated 18.10.2013 passed by this Court in Crl.O.P.No.26844 of 2013.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Krishnakumar For Respondent : Mr.K.V.Dhanapalan, SGP ORDER This contempt petition has been filed alleging that the order of this Court dated 18.10.2013 passed in Crl.OP No.26844 of 2013 has been disobeyed by the respondent.
2. By order dated 18.10.2013 in Crl.OP No.26844 of 2013, this Court had directed the respondent police to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner to safeguard the petitioner and the employees and staff of the petitioner society and also the subject property at No.91, Sir C.P.Ramasamy Road, Alwarpet, Chennai-18, at the cost of the petitioner. Since the said order was not complied with by the respondent, the petitioner has come up with the present contempt petition.
3. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondent submitted that the petitioner has not approached the respondent for payment of cost so as to avail police protection as directed by this Court on 18.10.2013. Further, learned Special Government Pleader invited the attention of this Court to the typed set of papers filed along with this petition, wherein, no such reference was available.
4. In view of the submission so made by the learned Special Government Pleader, in order to give quietus to the issue involved herein, this Court directs the petitioner to approach the respondent and pay necessary cost for availing police protection and on such approach and payment of cost, the respondent is directed to provide adequate police protection, as directed by this Court earlier on 18.10.2013.
5. With the above directions, this contempt petition is closed.
10.02.2017 Index:Yes/No srn/rk R.MAHADEVAN, J.
rk Cont.P.No.240 of 2017 DATED: 10.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in