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.

T.N.Janarthanan Vs B.Arulkumar and another

T.N.Janarthanan vs B.Arulkumar and another

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Jan 30, 2026
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1414193

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
CONT P/285/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

T.N.Janarthanan

Respondent

B.Arulkumar and another

Excerpt

in the high court of judicature at madrasdated: 30-01-2026coramthe hon'ble mr.justice k.kumaresh babu t.n.janarthanan no. 48, k. c. garden, 4th street, peravallur, chennai 600 082, tamil nadu, india ..petitioner(s) vs1. b.arulkumar trading as namma veetu kalyanam catering, no.95, poona palayam, tripicane, chennai 600 005.2. a.hariharan managing director of namma veetu kalyanam catering, no.9/5, poona palayam, triplicane, chennai - 600 005. ..contemnor(s)prayer: contempt petition filed under section 11 of the contempt of courts act, 1971, praying to punish the respondents herein for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this hon’ble court dated 18/10/2024 in oa.no.762 of 2024 in c.s.(comm.div)no.195 of 2024. page1 of 3 for petitioner(s): m/s.v.santhiya for m/s.mission legal, ramesh ganapathyorderthe present contempt petition has been filed to punish the respondents herein for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this hon’ble court dated 18/10/2024 in oa.no.762 of 2024 in c.s.(comm.div)no.195 of 2024.2. when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reported that the suit itself had been disposed of by recording a joint compromise between the parties.3. since the parties have compromised the lis between themselves, there is no necessity to further adjudicate upon this contempt petition.4. recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this contempt petition stands closed. no costs. index: yes/no neutral citation: yes/no kak page2 of 3k.kumaresh babu, j.kak page3 of 3

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30-01-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU T.N.Janarthanan No. 48, K. C. Garden, 4th Street, Peravallur, Chennai 600 082, Tamil Nadu, India ..Petitioner(s) Vs

1. B.Arulkumar Trading as Namma Veetu Kalyanam Catering, No.95, Poona Palayam, Tripicane, Chennai 600 005.

2. A.Hariharan Managing Director of Namma Veetu Kalyanam Catering, No.9/5, Poona Palayam, Triplicane, Chennai - 600 005. ..Contemnor(s)

Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the Respondents herein for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the Order of this Hon’ble Court dated 18/10/2024 in OA.No.762 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div)No.195 of 2024. Page1 of 3 For Petitioner(s): M/s.V.Santhiya For M/s.Mission Legal, Ramesh Ganapathy

ORDER

The present contempt petition has been filed to punish the Respondents herein for wilful and deliberate disobedience of the Order of this Hon’ble Court dated 18/10/2024 in OA.No.762 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div)No.195 of 2024.

2. When the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner reported that the suit itself had been disposed of by recording a joint compromise between the parties.

3. Since the parties have compromised the lis between themselves, there is no necessity to further adjudicate upon this contempt petition.

4. Recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this contempt petition stands closed. No costs. Index: Yes/No Neutral Citation: Yes/No kak Page2 of 3

K.KUMARESH BABU, J.

kak Page3 of 3

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial