AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
4 paragraphs · 206 wordsN.K. Patil, J.—This contempt petition is filed by the complainant seeking to initiate action against the respondents/accused for willful disobedience and committing contempt of the order dated 21-1-2011 in W.P. No. 40040 of 2010 vide Annexure-A. We have heard learned Counsel for the complainant and the learned Counsel for the accused.
Sri T.P. Vivekananda, learned Counsel for the complainant at the outset submitted that the instant contempt petition may be disposed of following the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in CCC (Civil) No. 1919 of 2013, disposed of on 7-1-2014 filed by the complainant for not obeying the order dated 1-4-2011 in W.P. No. 41884 of 2010.
In reply, Sri Subramanya, learned Counsel for the accused submitted that the instant contempt petition may be disposed of by giving reasonable time i.e., 15-4-2014 for compliance of the order dated 21-1-2011 in W.P. No. 40040 of 2010. The submissions made by the learned Counsel for both parties are placed on record. This contempt petition is dropped, directing the accused/respondents to comply with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge on or before 15-4-2014, reserving liberty to the complainant to revive the matter if so advised or need arises.
Ordered accordingly.