The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for compliance with court orders, particularly in cases involving the removal of encroachments and hindrance to traffic flow.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of The Contempt of Courts Act praying to punish the respondent for the wilful disobedience of the order of this Court passed in WP No. 29852 of 2017 dated 31.01.2019.)

1. The petitioner has come up with this contempt petition praying to initiate appropriate contempt proceedings against the first respondent herein for having wilfully disobeyed the order dated 31.01.2019 passed by this Court in WP No. 29582 of 2017.

2. The petitioner has filed WP No. 29582 of 2017 before this Court praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 2 to 7 therein to remove all the fencing pillar stones laid down by the eighth respondent therein by encroaching the land, restore the land to its original position and keep it open for the usage of Villagers and Weavers.

3. According to the petitioner, he is a resident of No.38, Pavadi Street, Bhavani Post and Taluk and in front of his house, the land classified as Natham Poromboke is used as “Pavadi” and commonly known as “Pavadi Rettukara Theru” and it exists from time immemorial. According to the petitioner, the land in front of his house is kept vacant for the purpose of being used by the Villagers and weavers for starching the yarn and preparing the yarn in the process of preparation of handloom. While so, the eighth respondent in the writ petition has filed a suit in O.S. No. 355 of 1999 before the I Additional District Munsif Court, Bhavani for a mandatory injunction and for declaring the easmentary rights for utilising the land for weavers usage and for a consequential permanent injunction restraining the defendants therein from interfering with such use. The said suit in O.S. No. 355 of 1999 was taken up for hearing along with other suits in O.S. No. 149 of 1999 and O.S. No. 224 of 2000 and ultimately, a decree for easmentary right and permanent injunction was granted in favour of the eighth respondent and in respect of the relief of mandatory injunction, the suit was dismissed. As against the same, A.S. No. 30 of 2004 was filed before the Sub Court, Bhavani, in which the decree granted in favour of the eighth respondent was set aside. Aggrieved by the same, Second Appeal No. 340 of 2005 was filed before this Court and it was allowed on 10.12.2012 by restoring the decree and Judgment of the trial court. According to the petitioner, by taking advantage of the judgment and decree passed by this Court, the eighth respondent in the writ petition along with his henchmen laid pillar fencing stones on 13.11.2017 in the five feet gap surrounding the entire Natham Poromboke pavadi land to make it appear it as his own private land. The eighth respondent also closed the frontage and road approach of the petitioner house thereby preventing his ingress and egress. Even though the petitioner along with the residents and public resisted the act of the eighth respondent in encroaching upon the property and complained to the respondents 6 and 7, they did not take any action on the ground that the Civil Court has granted a decree in favour of the eighth respondent. According to the petitioner, inasmuch as the respondents 1 to 4 did not take any action against the eighth respondent, he has filed the writ petition for a Mandamus.

4. The writ petition was taken up for hearing by the Division Bench of this Court and it was disposed of on 31.01.2019 with an observation that the petitioner is bound by the Judgment passed by this Court on 10.12.2012 in S.A. No. 340 of 2005 and the findings rendered thereof has become final. While holding so, in para No.29 of the order dated 10.12.2012, it was observed as follows:-

“29. Insofar as the fencing of pillar stones in the Street by the eighth respondent being hindrance to the free flow of traffic, is concerned, as claimed by the first respondent in their counter affidavit at paragraph 5 of the present Writ Petition, as per Section 28 of the Tamil Nadu Highways Act, 2001, the first respondent shall inspect the