Pothumponnu Vs Nagarajan

Pothumponnu vs Nagarajan

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Orders Decided Feb 27, 2026

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1687470

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/1687470
Court: Chennai Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs Justice N. Mala
Decided On: Feb 27, 2026
Case Number: CONT P(MD)/26/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Pothumponnu

Respondent

Nagarajan

Excerpt

.....krishnan [died] 4.santhanalakshmi 5.k.mayil 6.k.mayilsamy 7.k.balakrishnan 8.k.kavitha 9.k.rathika 10.k.jayalalitha .. petitionersversusmadurai. .. respondent prayer:- contempt petition filed under section 11 of the contempt of courts act, to punish the contemnor / respondent no.2 under the contempt of courts act, for willful disobedience of order passed in wp.(md).no. for petitioners : mr.m.rajaraman for respondent : mr.f.deepak, spl.gporder(1)the contempt petition is filed by the petitioners to punish the respondent / contemnor for the willful disobedience of the order of this court dated 10.12.2024 made in wp.(md).no.15535/2023, wherein, this court directed the respondent herein, to conduct survey and fix four boundaries of the petitioners land in plot nos.78, 81, 82, 83 and 85, within a period of twelve weeks. (2)mr.f.deepak, learned special government pleader, accepting notice on behalf of the respondent, submitted on the basis of the order dated 26.02.2026, that when the inspection was conducted on the site, it was found that the petitioners were not in possession and that in the list of 76 beneficiaries in na.ka.no.1118/2026/a, the names of the petitioners were not found. it was further stated that there were only 76 plots on site and as far as the lands with respect to patta nos.78, 81, 82, 83 and 85, are concerned, there was no land available. the learned special government pleader submitted that therefore the contempt petition deserved to be dismissed. (3)in view of the above submission of the learned special government pleader, this court is of the view that the petitioners should challenge theorder dated 26.02.2026 and there is no contempt of the order of this courtdated 10.12.2024. (4)hence, the contempt petition is closed, giving liberty to the petitioners to challenge the order dated 26.02.2026, in a manner known to law. ap internet : yes to madurai.n.mala, j.ap

Full Judgment

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 27.02.2026
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALA 1.Pothuponnu 2.G.Pappa 3.Santhanalakshmi Krishnan [Died] 4.Santhanalakshmi 5.K.Mayil 6.K.Mayilsamy 7.K.Balakrishnan 8.K.Kavitha 9.K.Rathika 10.K.Jayalalitha .. Petitioners
Versus
Madurai. .. Respondent Prayer:- Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, to punish the contemnor / respondent No.2 under the Contempt of Courts Act, for willful disobedience of order passed in WP.(MD).No. For Petitioners : Mr.M.Rajaraman For Respondent : Mr.F.Deepak, Spl.Gp

ORDER

(1)The contempt petition is filed by the petitioners to punish the respondent / contemnor for the willful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 10.12.2024 made in WP.(MD).No.15535/2023, wherein, this Court directed the respondent herein, to conduct survey and fix four boundaries of the petitioners land in Plot Nos.78, 81, 82, 83 and 85, within a period of twelve weeks. (2)Mr.F.Deepak, learned Special Government Pleader, accepting notice on behalf of the respondent, submitted on the basis of the order dated 26.02.2026, that when the inspection was conducted on the site, it was found that the petitioners were not in possession and that in the list of 76 beneficiaries in Na.Ka.No.1118/2026/A, the names of the petitioners were not found. It was further stated that there were only 76 plots on site and as far as the lands with respect to Patta Nos.78, 81, 82, 83 and 85, are concerned, there was no land available. The learned Special Government Pleader submitted that therefore the contempt petition deserved to be dismissed. (3)In view of the above submission of the learned Special Government Pleader, this Court is of the view that the petitioners should challenge the

order dated 26.02.2026 and there is no contempt of the order of this Court

dated 10.12.2024. (4)Hence, the contempt petition is closed, giving liberty to the petitioners to challenge the order dated 26.02.2026, in a manner known to law. AP Internet : Yes To Madurai.

N.MALA, J.

Same Court & Year Chennai Orders · 2026 Same Parties Pothumponnu vs Nagarajan Same Judge Honourable Mrs Justice N. Mala