2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 49377

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J
Karuppa Pillai – Appellant
Versus
Amuthavalli – Respondent
CONT P No. 3952 of 2025

Contempt proceedings are liable to be closed or stayed when the subject matter of the alleged disobedience is sub judice before an appellate court, subject to the petitioner's liberty to revive if the underlying order remains intact.

Headnote:The present matter concerns a petition filed under S.11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging willful disobedience of a judicial order dated 15.09.2023. During the pendency of the proceedings, it was brought to the court's attention that an appeal had been filed against the underlying order along with an application to condone a delay of 717 days. The court noted that a Division Bench had stayed further action on the contempt proceedings pending the outcome of the appellate process. The primary issue before the court was whether the contempt proceedings should proceed despite the pendency of a Writ Appeal and a stay of execution. Relying on the directions issued by the Appellate Bench of the court, it was determined that maintaining the status quo was necessary to avoid legal inconsistency. Consequently, the court found it appropriate to defer the contempt action until the resolution of the appeal. The contempt petition is closed with liberty granted to the petitioner to revive the proceedings upon the final determination of the Writ Appeal.