Case Note & Summary
The case involves a contempt petition filed by T.Anthonysamy against K.Alagu Mani, the Block Development Officer, and Arul Jothi, the Tahsildar, alleging willful disobedience of an order passed by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in W.P.(MD)No.16228 of 2018 dated 07.12.2018. The original writ petition pertained to removal of encroachment. The contempt petition was filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, seeking punishment for the contemnors. During the hearing, the Additional Government Pleader submitted that the order had been complied with and the encroachment had been removed. The court, comprising Justice M.S.Ramesh and Justice A.D.Maria Clete, observed that since the order was complied with, the alleged disobedience could not be termed willful. Consequently, the contempt petition was closed. The court did not impose any punishment or costs.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Compliance - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 11 - The petitioner alleged willful disobedience of a court order directing removal of encroachment. The court found that the order had been complied with and the encroachment removed, and therefore the disobedience could not be termed willful. The contempt petition was closed. (Paras 1-2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the alleged disobedience of the court order was willful and whether the contempt petition should be sustained after compliance.
Final Decision
The contempt petition is closed as the order has been complied with and the disobedience cannot be termed willful.
Law Points
- Contempt of Courts Act
- 1971
- Section 11
- Willful Disobedience
- Compliance
- Encroachment Removal
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 91
Cont.P.(MD) No.198 of 2020 in W.P.(MD) No.16228 of 2018
M.S.RAMESH, A.D.MARIA CLETE
Mr.T.Lenin Kumar, Mr.J.Ashok
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a court order.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought punishment of the contemnors for willful disobedience of the order dated 07.12.2018 in W.P.(MD) No.16228 of 2018.
Filing Reason
Alleged willful disobedience of the court order directing removal of encroachment.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 07.12.2018 in W.P.(MD) No.16228 of 2018 was passed, which is the subject of the contempt petition.
Issues
Whether the alleged disobedience was willful.
Submissions/Arguments
Additional Government Pleader submitted that the order had been complied with and encroachment removed.
Ratio Decidendi
When an order alleged to be disobeyed is subsequently complied with, the disobedience cannot be termed willful, and the contempt petition may be closed.
Judgment Excerpts
Alleging willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.16228 of 2018 dated 07.12.2018, this Contempt Petition has been filed.
When the matter was taken up for hearing today, it is submitted by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the order under contempt has been complied with and the encroachment has been removed. As such the disobedience alleged cannot be termed as wilful in nature. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed.
Procedural History
The original writ petition W.P.(MD) No.16228 of 2018 was filed and disposed on 07.12.2018. Subsequently, the present contempt petition was filed on an unspecified date. The matter was heard on 24.01.2025, and the court closed the contempt petition.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: Section 11
