Dr. Preeti Upadhyay Vs. Dr. Sanjay Tiwari - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/1052713
CourtMadhya Pradesh High Court
Decided OnJan-09-2013
AppellantDr. Preeti Upadhyay
RespondentDr. Sanjay Tiwari
Excerpt:
conc. case no :34. 2013 dr. preeti upadhyay versus dr. sanjay tiwari and another. 09.01.2013. shri praveen chourasia for the applicant. shri mahendra pateriya with shri s.k.chaturvedi for the non-applicants. interalia contending that the directions issued by this court on 14.9.2012, in w.p.no.15199/2012, has not been complied with within a period of two months as directed, this writ petition is filed. having heard learned counsel for the applicant and on a perusal of the records it is seen that after orders were passed on 14.9.2012, certified copy of the order was prepared and according to the documents – annexure c/1, counsel for the applicant communicated the order to the registrar on 28.12.2012. neither in the body of the contempt petition not in the documents filed, there is any averment or material adduced to show that the order was ever communicated to the non-applicants prior to 28.12.2012. if the order was communicated on 28.12.2012, then the period of two months fixed by this court is yet to be over and, therefore, this contempt application filed is premature. in view of the above, i am not inclined to initiate any action for contempt. instead, non-applicants are directed to take a decision in the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. with the aforesaid liberty to the non-applicants, this application stands disposed of. certified copy as per rules. (rajendra menon) judge aks/-
Judgment:

Conc.

Case No :

34. 2013 Dr.

Preeti Upadhyay versus Dr.

Sanjay Tiwari and another.

09.01.2013.

Shri Praveen Chourasia for the applicant.

Shri Mahendra Pateriya with Shri S.K.Chaturvedi for the non-applicants.

Interalia contending that the directions issued by this Court on 14.9.2012, in W.P.No.15199/2012, has not been complied with within a period of two months as directed, this writ petition is filed.

Having heard learned counsel for the applicant and on a perusal of the records it is seen that after orders were passed on 14.9.2012, certified copy of the order was prepared and according to the documents – Annexure C/1, counsel for the applicant communicated the order to the Registrar on 28.12.2012.

Neither in the body of the contempt petition not in the documents filed, there is any averment or material adduced to show that the order was ever communicated to the non-applicants prior to 28.12.2012.

If the order was communicated on 28.12.2012, then the period of two months fixed by this Court is yet to be over and, therefore, this Contempt Application filed is premature.

In view of the above, I am not inclined to initiate any action for contempt.

Instead, non-applicants are directed to take a decision in the matter within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.

With the aforesaid liberty to the non-applicants, this application stands disposed of.

Certified copy as per rules.

(RAJENDRA MENON) JUDGE Aks/-