← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaCC/679/2019closed no costs

Jangili Sathaiah v. Sri Murali Krishna

2019-09-07Sanjay Kumar2 pages

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTI CE SANJAY KUMAR CONTEMPT CASE NO.679 OF 2019

O R D E R

This contempt case was instituted alleging wilful disobedience to the order dated 27.03.2019 passed by this Court in W.P.No.5455 of 2019. By the said order, the Tahsildar, Nagaram Mandal, Suryapet District, was directed to take appropriate action upon the petitioner's representation which was received on 13.11.2018 within a time frame. Perusal of the record reflects that the Tahsildar, Nagaram Mandal, Suryapet District, did pass an order on 07.06.2019. Therein, he referred to the pendency of civil suits in O.S.No.51 of 2016 and O.S.No.35 of 2016 in relation to the subject land and also W.P.No.4494 of 2019 which was filed by the petitioner and his sons.

The Tahsildar concluded that in the light of the litigation pending before the Civil Court and the High Court, the request of the petitioner to enter his name in the revenue records could not be considered and directed the Village Revenue Officer, Phanigiri Village, to round off the names of certain third parties as per the orders of the Revenue Divisional Officer, Suryapet Division, and record in the last column as 'dispute before Civil Courts'. He further granted liberty to the petitioner to file a fresh petition after disposal of the cases. Sri J. Ramesh, learned counsel representing Sri P.Lalitha Kamesh, learned counsel for the petitioner, would inform this Court that O.S.No.51 of 2016 was dismissed as withdrawn on 24.06.2019 but concedes that O.S.No.35 of 2016 and W.P.No.4494 of 2019 are still pending.

Court stands duly complied with. It would not be open to this Court to examine the validity of such compliance in exercise of contempt jurisdiction. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the proceedings dated 07.06.2019, it is for him to seek redressal thereof by way of an independent proceedings before the competent forum. Leaving it open to him to do so, the contempt case is closed. No order as to costs. _______________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 6th SEPTEMBER, 2019 Svv