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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 44029

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J
M/s.Asan Memorial Association – Appellant
Versus
Dhanasekaran S – Respondent
Contempt Petitions | Cont.P.Nos.1907 & 1908 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Varoon R
For the Respondents: Mr.M.Purushothaman

Compliance with court orders after initial disobedience can mitigate contempt findings.

Headnote:The contempt petitions were initiated under Sections 11 & 12 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 due to the respondent's failure to comply with court orders regarding school fees payment. The respondent presented an apology and evidence of payment, requesting leniency due to financial difficulties. The court accepted this explanation, leading to the closure of the petitions.

Table of Content
1. establishing contempt through failure to comply with court orders. (Para 1)
2. apology and evidence of compliance may mitigate contempt penalties. (Para 3)
3. final outcome resulting in closure of petitions. (Para 4)

COMMON ORDER

Both the contempt petitions relate to an undertaking that was given by the contemnor as regards the payment of school fees. On the last date of hearing, Mr.A.R.Karunakaran represented that despite the undertaking, the school fees had not been paid. Therefore, I permitted Mr.A.R.Karunakaran to serve the papers on Mr.M.Purushothaman, who represented the contemnors in the revisional proceedings.

2. When the matter was taken up today, I heard Mr,Varoon for Mr.A.R.Karunakaran and Mr.M.Purushothaman.

3. Mr.M.Purushothaman has produced the unconditional apology of Mr.Dhanasekaran, the contemnor, in both the revisions. In addition, Mr.M.Purushothaman has also produced payment receipts for a sum of Rs.40,000/- (Cont.P.No.1907 of 2025) and Rs.50,000/- (Cont.P.No.1908 of 2025). Mr.M.Purushothaman pleads that on account of financial difficulties, his client could not pay the amounts on time, but points out that the fees have since been paid, and therefore, requests a lenient view may be taken by this Court.

4. As the order has been complied with, albeit with some delay, I am inclined to accept the explanation given. The contempt petitions are closed. No costs.

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top