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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 67334

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N. MALA, J
Mahendra College of Engineering – Appellant
Versus
Dr.J.Prakash – Respondent
Sub Application No. 1074 of 2025 | W.P.No. 38 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s.Kandhan Duraisami
For the Respondents:Mr.J.Ravindran, Additional Advocate General, Assisted by Mr.U.Baranidharan

Compliance with court orders is essential and non-disputed compliance results in closure of contempt petitions.

Headnote:This contempt petition, filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeks to punish the respondent for breaching the Court’s prior order dated 05.02.2025 related to W.P.No. 38 of 2025. During the hearing, the Additional Advocate General submitted that compliance with the order has been achieved, which was not disputed by the petitioner’s counsel. Consequently, the contempt petition was closed, and the connected sub-application was also terminated.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 19-11-2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE N. MALA and SUB APPL No.1074 of 2025 Mahendra College of Engineering, represented by its Principal, Dr. N.Mohanasundararaju, Attur Main Road, Minnampalli, Salem 636106.

Petitioner(s)

Vs Dr.J.Prakash, Registrar, Anna University, Chennai 600 025.

Contemnor(s)

Contempt petition is filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the Respondent herein for deliberately violating the order of this Honourable Court dated 05.02.2025 and made in W.P.No. 38 of 2025 For Petitioner(s): M/s.Kandhan Duraisami For Contemnor(s): Mr.J.Ravindran, Additional Advocate General , Assisted by Mr.U.Baranidharan

ORDER

When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Additional Advocate General, produced a copy of the notification issued by the University and submitted that the order of this Court made in W.P.No. 38 of 2025, dated

05.02.2025, has been complied.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner did not dispute the compliance.

Hence, the contempt petition is closed. Consequently, the connected sub application is closed.

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