Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rajaram Vs. Kannabiran

Rajaram vs Kannabiran

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Aug 16, 2016
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1188970

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Cont.P(Md)No. 744 of 2016 in W.P(MD)No. 21312 of 2015
Subject
Contempt of Court

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Contempt of Court Act, 1971 - Section 11 -

Key legal issue
Contempt of Court

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rajaram

Respondent

Kannabiran

Excerpt

contempt of court act, 1971 - section 11 -(common prayer:contempt petitions filed to initiate contempt proceedings under section 11 of the contempt of court act, 1971 to punish the respondent for wilfully disobeying the order dated 30.11.2015, passed in w.p(md)no.21312 of 2015.) 1. heard both sides. 2. the respondent/contemnor mr.s.kannabiran, revenue divisional officer, kovilpatti, thoothukudi district is present today before this court. 3. at this stage, the learned government advocate appearing for the respondent/contemnor brings it to the notice of this court that the order passed in the main writ petition in w.p(md)no.21312 of 2015, dated 30.11.2015 was complied with. this fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. recording the aforesaid fact, the contempt petition is closed, since nothing survives for adjudication in the contempt petition. the presence of mr.s.kannabiran,revenue divisional officer, kovilpatti, thoothukudi district is dispensed with.

Full Judgment

(Common Prayer:Contempt Petitions filed to initiate Contempt Proceedings under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act, 1971 to punish the Respondent for wilfully disobeying the order dated 30.11.2015, passed in W.P(MD)No.21312 of 2015.)

1. Heard both sides.

2. The Respondent/Contemnor Mr.S.Kannabiran, Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District is present today before this Court.

3. At this stage, the Learned Government Advocate appearing for the Respondent/Contemnor brings it to the notice of this Court that the order passed in the main Writ Petition in W.P(MD)No.21312 of 2015, dated 30.11.2015 was complied with. This fact is not disputed by the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

4. Recording the aforesaid fact, the Contempt Petition is closed, since nothing survives for adjudication in the Contempt Petition. The presence of Mr.S.Kannabiran,Revenue Divisional Officer, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District is dispensed with.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial