Muruganantham Vs. P. Nagarajan

Muruganantham vs P. Nagarajan

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Jun 22, 2016

~1 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1190296

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1190296
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: M. Venugopal
Decided On: Jun 22, 2016
Case Number: Cont.P(Md)Nos. 466 of 2015 & 242 of 2016 & SUB.A(MD)No. 59 of 2016 & W.P(MD)No. 3531 of 2015
Subject: Education

Case Summary

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

Contempt of Courts Act - Section 11-

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Muruganantham

Respondent

P. Nagarajan

Excerpt

contempt of courts act - section 11-(prayer:contempt petition filed under section 11 of the contempt of courts act praying this court to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order of this court dated 31.3.2015 made in cont.p(md)no.466 of 2015 in w.p(md)no.3531 of 2015 for committing contempt of court.) 1. heard both sides. 2. it is represented on behalf of the petitioner that balance payment by virtue of the earlier order, dated 26.4.2016 was complied with by the respondent. 3. recording the same, the contempt petition stands closed. consequently, connected sub-application is closed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer:Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act praying this Court to punish the respondent for wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 31.3.2015 made in Cont.P(MD)No.466 of 2015 in W.P(MD)No.3531 of 2015 for committing contempt of Court.)

1. Heard both sides.

2. It is represented on behalf of the Petitioner that balance payment by virtue of the earlier order, dated 26.4.2016 was complied with by the Respondent.

3. Recording the same, the Contempt Petition stands closed. Consequently, connected Sub-Application is closed.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties Muruganantham vs P. Nagarajan Same Subject Education Same Judge M. Venugopal

Education