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

2024 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 36611

HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J
V.Venkatesh – Appellant
Versus
K.Ramya – Respondent


COMMON ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

Three contempt petitions have been instituted to punish the respondents for wilfull disobedience of the interim orders passed by the Family Court, Chennai in I.A.No.2283/2017 in OP 93/2017, I.A.No.03/2019 in OP No.3344/2019 and I.A.No.07/2021 in OP.No.3344/2019.

2. Admittedly, the matrimonial dispute exist between the contempt petitioner and the respondent. Since we are dealing with the contempt petition, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the matrimonial dispute, which all are expected to be adjudicated before the Court concerned.

3. Mr.G.Rajagopalan, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the present contempt petitions are filed under Section 10 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

4. Section 10 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 contemplates power of High Court to punish contempts of subordinate Courts. Therefore, High Court is empowered to deal with the contempt petition in respect of interim orders passed by the Family Courts or any other courts subordinate to the High Court concerned.

5. In respect of delay in filing the contempt petition against the interim order passed in the years 2

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top