Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Kulandaivelu, filed a contempt petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging wilful disobedience of an order dated 17.07.2017 passed by the Madras High Court in W.P.No.18016 of 2017. The respondent was the Revenue Tahsildar, Kallakurichi. The certified copy of the order was made ready by the Registry on 10.08.2017 and delivered to the petitioner on 16.08.2017. However, the contempt petition was instituted only on 12.11.2025, after a lapse of about 7.5 years. The court noted that the petition was hit by the period of limitation under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Consequently, the court dismissed the contempt petition without examining the merits of the alleged disobedience.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Limitation - Wilful Disobedience - Section 11, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - The contempt petition was filed after a delay of about 7.5 years from the date of receipt of the order alleged to have been disobeyed. The court held that the petition is hit by the period of limitation under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and dismissed the petition. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a contempt petition filed after a lapse of about 7.5 years from the date of receipt of the order is maintainable in view of the period of limitation under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is dismissed as it is hit by the period of limitation under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Law Points
- Limitation for contempt petition
- Wilful disobedience
- Delay in filing
- Contempt of Courts Act
- 1971
Case Details
2026 LawText (MAD) (04) 130
S. M. Subramaniam, K. Surender
Ms.R.Divyapreathika, Mr.A.Selvendran
Pasubathi, The Revenue Tahsildar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition for wilful disobedience of court order
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought punishment of respondent for wilful disobedience of order dated 17.07.2017 in W.P.No.18016 of 2017
Filing Reason
Alleged wilful disobedience of court order by respondent
Previous Decisions
Order dated 17.07.2017 passed in W.P.No.18016 of 2017
Issues
Whether the contempt petition is barred by limitation under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971
Ratio Decidendi
A contempt petition filed after a delay of about 7.5 years from the date of receipt of the order is barred by limitation under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and must be dismissed.
Judgment Excerpts
The present contempt petition has been instituted to punish the respondent for his wilful disobedience of the order of this Court dated 17.07.2017 passed in W.P.No.18016 of 2017.
The certified copy of the order passed in the writ petition was made ready by the Registry, High Court on 10.08.2017 and was delivered to the petitioner on 16.08.2017. However, the present contempt petition was instituted only on 12.11.2025, after a lapse of about 7 1/2 years.
Thus, the present contempt petition is hit by period of limitation as contemplated under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
In view of the above, the Contempt Petition stands dismissed.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed W.P.No.18016 of 2017, which was disposed of by order dated 17.07.2017. The certified copy was delivered on 16.08.2017. The contempt petition was filed on 12.11.2025, after a delay of about 7.5 years.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: 11
