Advocates:
['M/S K RAJASEKARAN', '', 'A SWAMINATHAN', 'M R GOKUL KRISHNA', 'M/S LOVESAL RAMESH', '', 'VIJAYALAKSHMI', 'AARTHI', 'LAKSHMANAN']

Cont.P.No.1607 of 2011

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 22.02.2021

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

Cont.P.No.1607 of 2011

R.Kalavalli,

No.2.Maran Nagar Extension,

Poonamallee, Chennai 56.

... Petitioner

Vs.

1. P.Sundaraj,

S/o.Perumalraj,

19/27, Kailaya Chetty Street,

Old Washermenpet,

Chennai 600 021.

2. S.Bhagya Rekha,

W/o.Sundaraj,

19/27, Kailaya Chetty Street,

Old Washermenpet,

Chennai 600 021.

3. Ashok Kumar,

S/o.Arunachalam,

9, Kamarajar Street,

Indira Nagar,

Poonamallee,

Chennai 600 056.

... Respondents

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, to

punish the respondents herein for their wilful disobedience of the order of

this Court made in M.P.Nos.2 and 3 of 2010 in C.R.P.No.3256 of 2010

dated 04.01.2011.

1/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Cont.P.No.1607 of 2011

For Petitioner

: Mr.K.Rajasekaran

For Respondents

: No Appearance

O R D E R

This Petition has been filed to punish the respondents for their wilful

disobedience of the order of this Court made in M.P.Nos.2 and 3 of 2010 in

C.R.P.No.3256 of 2010 dated 04.01.2011.

2. This Court by an order dated 04.01.2011 allowed the Civil

Revision Petition and set aside the order of dismissal of the suit passed by

the trial Court and directed to restore the suit in O.S.No.9 of 2009 after

providing reasonable opportunity to the petitioner herein to pay the deficit

Court fee within reasonable time to be fixed by the Court below and dispose

the suit in accordance with law.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that after passing

the order and before obtaining copy of the order, the respondents sold out

the suit property in favour of the third parties. The suit has been filed for

declaration to declare that the sale deed in respect of the suit property

obtained from the respondents in a fraudulent manner as null and void.

Therefore, they committed contempt of Court by disobeying the order

passed by this Court. The respondents filed a petition for rejection of plaint,

on the ground of deficit Court fee and the same was allowed by the trial

Court. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed this Civil Revision

2/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Cont.P.No.1607 of 2011

Petition and this Court allowed the same and directed the petitioner to pay

the deficit Court fee. While being so, according to the petitioner, the

respondents sold out the suit property, on the strength of the sale deed

which is under challenge in the main suit in favour of the third parties.

Therefore, the petitioner can very well approach the trial Court for

appropriate relief after restoring the suit. No contempt is made out as

against the respondents.

4. Recording the said submission, this Contempt Petition is

dismissed.

SD/-

ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES)

kv

//Certified to be true copy//

Dated at Madras this the day of 2021.

COURT OFFICER(O.S.)

from 25^th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of

the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

GS/26/03/2021

3/3

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/