Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, N. Kannaiah, filed a contempt petition before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court under Section 11 of the Contempt of Court, seeking to punish the respondent officials for wilful disobedience of an earlier order of the court dated 29.06.2022 in W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2020. The original writ petition had resulted in a direction to the respondents, Sukumar (Tahsildar, Pattukottai Taluk) and K. Senthil Kumar (Sub Treasury Officer), apparently for payment of certain sums to the petitioner. Alleging that the respondents had not complied, the contempt proceedings were initiated. During the hearing on 25.02.2025, the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents submitted a compliance affidavit filed by the second respondent dated 24.02.2025, which stated that a proposal for payment had been sanctioned and the amount had been credited to the petitioner. The petitioner's counsel confirmed receipt of the full amount and expressed no objection to the respondents being discharged from the contempt proceedings. The court found that the original order had been complied with, and that continuing the contempt proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the court discharged the respondents from the contempt proceedings and disposed of the contempt petition without costs.
Headnote
A) Contempt of Court - Civil Contempt - Discharge from Contempt Proceedings - Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Section 11 - Contempt petition alleged wilful disobedience of the order in W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2020 dated 29.06.2022. Respondents filed a compliance affidavit confirming payment to the petitioner, and the petitioner acknowledged receipt and had no objection to discharge. Held that continuing the contempt proceedings would serve no useful purpose once the original order had been complied with, and the respondents were discharged accordingly. (Paras 2-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the respondents are guilty of contempt for non-compliance of earlier order, and whether proceedings should be closed upon compliance.
Final Decision
Contempt petition disposed of; respondents discharged from proceedings; no costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Contempt of court
- wilful disobedience
- compliance of court order
- discharging contemnors
Case Details
2025 LawText (MAD) (02) 218
CONT.P(MD)No.3147 of 2024
Ms.S.Jainab Beevi for petitioner, Mr.D.Sadiq Raja, Additional Government Pleader for respondents
Sukumar, Tahsildar, Pattukottai Taluk, Thanjavur District and K. Senthil Kumar, Sub Treasury Officer, Pattukottai Taluk, Thanjavur District
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience of a writ court order.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought punishment of respondents for contempt.
Filing Reason
Non-compliance of order in W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2020 dated 29.06.2022.
Previous Decisions
Order in W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2020 dated 29.06.2022 for payment of amount.
Issues
Whether the respondents committed contempt by not complying with the earlier writ order.
Whether the contempt proceedings should be closed after compliance.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel submitted that entire amount received and no objection to discharge respondents.
Respondents' counsel filed compliance affidavit showing payment made and sought discharge.
Ratio Decidendi
When a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience is filed and respondents subsequently comply with the original order, court may discharge them and close the proceedings if no useful purpose is served by continuing.
Judgment Excerpts
2.I respectfully state that the subject contempt petition has been filed for non compliance of the order made in W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2020 dated 29.06.2022 ... the order had been complied with, the subject contempt petition may be closed.
3.Ms.S.Jainab Beevi, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in compliance of the order ... the entire amount has been received by the petitioner and she has no objection to discharge the respondents from the contempt proceedings.
4.After considering the compliance affidavit ... the respondents are discharged from the present contempt proceedings. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is disposed of. No costs.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.9193 of 2020 and obtained order dated 29.06.2022. Alleging non-compliance, the petitioner filed Contempt Petition (MD) No. 3147 of 2024. On 18.02.2025, the court directed compliance. On 25.02.2025, the second respondent filed compliance affidavit and the court discharged the respondents and disposed of the petition.
Acts & Sections
- Contempt of Courts Act, 1971: Section 11
