SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(AP) 562

ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT AT AMARAVATI
M.Ganga Rao, J.
Hari Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Thirupathi Sai – Respondent
Contempt Case No. 866 of 2019
Decided On : 17-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
Challa Sivasankar, Advocate

Wilful and deliberate violation of a court order is required to establish contempt of court under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

Headnote:

CONTEMPT OF COURT - NON-COMPLIANCE OF COURT ORDER - SECTIONS 10 AND 12 OF THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT, 1971 - SUMMARY

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner filed a contempt case alleging non-compliance of court order by the respondent-contemnor, a Tahsildar, in not considering and disposing of the petitioner's online application for mutation and issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds within the stipulated time.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondent had verified the revenue records and concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought due to the land being classified as 'Inam' and 'Manager Jilekhana Masjid'. The respondent had served an endorsement to the petitioner's counsel and sent it by registered post, explaining the reasons for rejecting the application.

Issues: Whether the respondent wilfully and deliberately violated the court order passed in W.P.No.3285 of 2019.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the respondent's actions did not constitute wilful and deliberate violation of the court order. The respondent had taken steps to verify the records and provided a detailed explanation for rejecting the petitioner's application. The court relied on the Supreme Court precedent in J.S.Parihar Vs. Ganpat Duggar and others, which held that once the government passes an order based on court directions, any grievance arising from the order should be addressed through an appropriate forum rather than contempt proceedings.

Final Decision: The contempt case was dismissed, and no order was made as to costs.

JUDGMENT

M.Ganga Rao, J. - The petitioner filed this contempt case under the provisions of Sections 10 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short 'the Act') complaining that the respondent-contemnor has not complied with the order passed by this Court on 13.03.2019 in W.P.No.3285 of 2019, whereunder and whereby this Court directed the Tahsildar - 4th respondent therein to consider the online application if any submitted by the petitioner for mutation and for issuance of pattadar passbooks and title deeds and dispose of the same, if not already disposed of, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that order.

2. The allegation of the petitioner is that in spite of submitting representation for implementation of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.3285 of 2019 along with other documents, the 4th respondent refused to issue acknowledgement. Subsequently, his counsel issued contempt notice dated 11.09.2019 calling upon the respondent to implement the orders of this Court and the same was served on 16.09.2019 and in spite of the same, the respondent did not take any steps on his online application and the respondent wilfully and deliberately violated the orders of this Court and thereby liable for punishment.

3. The respondent filed his counter stating that he has verified the revenue records of Munagalapadu Village of Kurnool Mandal. The petitioner requested for issue E-Pattadar passbooks and title deeds and mutate his name in the revenue records, but the land extent Ac.6.00 situated in Sy.No.225 belongs to Jilekhan Mosque Waqf property and the land extent Ac.18.57 cents situated in Sy.No.225 is mentioned in Annexure-III of Munagalapadu Village under prohibited property list. Hence, the request of the petitioner is not considered. The endorsement issued to the petitioner vide respondent's office Rc.B.661/2019 dated 13.08.2019 was received by the petitioner's advocate by name Sri Ravi Kumar on 13.08.2019 and the endorsement was also sent to the petitioner by registered post on 28.10.2019. The petitioner filed the contempt case wilfully and purposefully suppressing the said fact. His predecessor could not take immediate action as per the orders of this Court, due to attending the duties of General Elections 2019 during the crucial period could not comply with the orders passed by this Court on 13.03.2019. The allegation of the petitioner is false and incorrect and prays to close the contempt case.

4. Sri Challa Siva Sankar, learned counsel for the petitioner, vehemently submits that the contemnor violated the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.3285 of 2019 wilfully and deliberately and the orders are not passed by the respondent within eight weeks' period as prescribed by this Court. The endorsement was not served on the petitioner and the respondent made mockery of the orders passed by this Court and liable for punishment.

5. Sri P.Subash, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, having stoutly opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, states that the respondent after taking charge as Tahsildar in the present station immediately verified the record thoroughly and came to the conclusion that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief sought in the writ petition and to that effect, he made an endorsement and served the same on the counsel for the petitioner on 13.08.2019 duly rejecting the plea of the petitioner vide Endorsement in Rc.B.661/2018 dated 13.08.2019.

6. This Court, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and submissions of the learned counsel, found that the petitioner filed the contempt case complaining wilful and deliberate violation of the orders of this Court on 13.03.2019 passed in W.P.No.3285 of 2019, suppressing the endorsement given to the counsel for the petitioner and the factum of serving the endorsement by registered post vide RN4174414841N IVR:8278417441484 on 28.10.2019 and also a

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      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

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top