Back
B. V. NAGARATHNA, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Gurudeep Singh – Appellant
Versus
Regonda Srinivas – Respondent
JUDGMENT
NAGARATHNA J.
The present Appeals arise out of the judgment dated 30.12.2022 in Contempt Case No. 776/2022 passed by the High Court of the State of Telangana whereby the Appellants, who are the Chairman & Managing Director and the General Manager (Human Resources) of the Company – NTPC Ltd. have been sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months and a fine of Rs. 2,000, by allowing the Contempt Case filed by the respondents herein.
2. The present appeals have been filed primarily on the ground that there has been no wilful and deliberate disobedience or noncompliance by the Appellants of the common judgment dated 17.12.2021 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court in WA No. 277/2020.
3. The present case pertains to the claim of Respondents and other similarly placed land oustees as Junior Mazdoors on the basis of a tripartite agreement in the year 1988 between NTPC Ltd. with the land oustees.
4. Briefly stated, the facts leading upto these appeals are that the Respondents herein and similarly situated persons were the absolute owners and possessors of the lands of various extents situated at different villages in Ramagundam Mandal, Karimnagar Distric
Contempt of Court – Court must be liberal in accepting unconditional apology tendered by contemnor.
(1) Writ Petition – If termination order is assailed on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice or fundamental rights guaranteed under Part III of Constitution, such a grievance can ....
The word “wilful” introduces a mental element and hence, requires looking into the mind of a person/contemnor by gauging his actions, which is an indication of one's state of mind. “Wilful” means kno....
The Court emphasized the need for the exercise of contempt powers in accordance with the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 and expressed concern over the Government's decision to lease waterbodies to a pr....
The court emphasized the statutory right under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act and the self-contained nature of the Act in regulating contempt proceedings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of a final order in the contempt proceedings for an appeal to be maintainable, and the limitation on the High Court's jurisdiction ....
Contempt jurisdiction limited to wilful disobedience; full compliance with final order via arrears and revisions renders proceedings infructuous, despite delays or withdrawals of interim benefits.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
