Case Note & Summary
The petitioner filed a contempt petition under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, alleging willful and deliberate disobedience of an order passed by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in W.P.(MD)No.19911 of 2019 dated 17.09.2019. The respondent, Chandrasekaran, the Tahsildar of Andipatti Taluk, Theni District, filed a status report indicating that the order had been complied with. Specifically, a spot inspection was conducted on 30.11.2019 and a report was filed before the Tahsildar. The court, comprising Justice M.S.Ramesh and Justice A.D.Maria Clete, observed that since the order had been complied with, the alleged disobedience could not be termed willful. Consequently, the contempt petition was closed without any further action.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Willful Disobedience - Section 11, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - Allegation of willful disobedience of a writ order - The court found that the order had been complied with as per the status report, and thus the disobedience could not be termed willful - Held that the contempt petition is closed (Paras 1-2).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondent's alleged disobedience of the court's order dated 17.09.2019 in W.P.(MD)No.19911 of 2019 was willful and deliberate, warranting contempt action.
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
- Contempt Petition Closed
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (01) 99
Cont.P.(MD) No.789 of 2020 in W.P.(MD) No.19911 of 2019
M.S.RAMESH, A.D.MARIA CLETE
Mr.K.Samidurai (for petitioner), Mr.S.Shaji Bino (for respondent)
Chandrasekaran, The Tahsildar, Andipatti Taluk, Theni District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition alleging willful disobedience of a writ court order.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought issuance of summons to the respondent and action for willful, deliberate disobedience of the order dated 17.09.2019 in W.P.(MD)No.19911 of 2019.
Filing Reason
Alleged non-compliance with the writ court order.
Previous Decisions
Order dated 17.09.2019 in W.P.(MD)No.19911 of 2019 was passed by this Court.
Issues
Whether the respondent's alleged disobedience of the court's order was willful and deliberate.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner alleged willful disobedience of the order.
Respondent filed status report showing compliance, including spot inspection on 30.11.2019 and report filed before Tahsildar.
Ratio Decidendi
For a contempt petition to succeed, the disobedience must be willful and deliberate. If the order has been complied with, the alleged disobedience cannot be termed willful, and the contempt petition is liable to be closed.
Judgment Excerpts
Alleging willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.19911 of 2019 dated 17.09.2019, this Contempt Petition has been filed.
The order of the Writ Court has been complied with, which fact is evident from the status report filed by the respondent, wherein it is stated that spot inspection was conducted on 30.11.2019 and a report was also filed before the Tahsildar.
As such the disobedience alleged cannot be termed as willful in nature. Accordingly, the contempt petition is closed.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.19911 of 2019, which was disposed of by order dated 17.09.2019. Alleging non-compliance, the petitioner filed Cont.P.(MD)No.789 of 2020 on an unspecified date. The respondent filed a status report showing compliance. The court heard the matter and closed the contempt petition on 24.01.2025.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: Section 11
