THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.706 of 2014 Dated: 31.10.2014 Between:
M. Vishnudhar .. Petitioner and Komalapalli Mohan Reddy .. Respondent Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. S.V. Ramana For Mr. O. Manohar Reddy Counsel for the respondent: Mr. Mohd. Gulam Hyder The court made the following:
ORDER:
This contempt case is filed alleging wilful disobedience of order dated 24.09.2004 in A.S.M.P.No.13523 of 2004 in A.S.No.3526 of 2004.
The respondent has admittedly executed three registered gift deeds contrary to the above-mentioned interim order directing him not to alienate or change the nature of the property in question in any manner whatsoever pending further orders. On 07.08.2014, this court has admitted the contempt case and ordered notice to the respondent. On 13.10.2014, learned counsel for the respondent has represented that his client has executed documents for cancellation of gift deeds and that the said documents have not been released by the Sub- Registrar. The respondent has subsequently filed memo/undertaking, wherein it is stated that he has executed two deeds bearing document Nos.5735/2014 and 5736/2014 on 23.09.2014, cancelling gift deeds bearing document Nos.941/2010 and 942/2010, both dated 26.02.2010, respectively.
With regard to gift deed bearing document No.945 of 2004 dated 24.01.2005, it is stated that the donee under the said gift deed by name Kokonda Radhika is presently living in Toronto and the respondent has undertaken to execute the cancellation of the said gift deed after her return to India. The respondent has filed the copies of two registered deeds of cancellation of gift settlement deeds in support of his averments.
Mr. S.V. Ramana, learned counsel for the petitioner, did not dispute the fact that the respondent has executed two deeds cancelling two gift deeds. The undertaking given by the respondent for cancellation of the third gift deed is placed on record. If the respondent fails to execute the cancellation deed within five months from today, the petitioner shall be free to file a fresh contempt case.
The contempt case is accordingly closed and the respondent is discharged from the contempt proceedings.
C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 31st October, 2014 IBL