Pushadapu Suryanarayana v. Sri Durga Prasad

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN Contempt Case No.2252 of 2018 Judgment:

The petitioner has come up with the above contempt application alleging violation of the order passed in the revision.

2. Heard Mr. V.S.R. Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. The petitioner obtained an interim order of injunction pending suit.

When he filed an application alleging disobedience, the Court below granted Police Aid in the first instance. But the Police informed the Court that the property was situate within the jurisdiction of another police station. Therefore, the first application was closed.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner took up another application for direction to the concerned police station. That application was dismissed only on the ground that the earlier direction was to a wrong police station. As against the dismissal of the 2nd application, the petitioner came up with the revision. The revision was allowed directing Chilakalapudi Police Station to provide Police Aid. Despite the petitioner's notice to the police station and the Superintendent of Police, they have not provided Police Aid forcing the petitioner to come up with the above contempt case.

5. Though this Court is not denuded of its power to issue contempt notice to the respondent, I think the

appropriate course of action is to direct the Trial Court to take up the application. What was done by this Court in the revision was to allow I.A.No.1119 of 2017. By my order dated 23-02-2018, I have allowed I.A.No.1119 of 2017 for the grant of Police Aid. Therefore, the Principal Junior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, should now take up that application and enforce that order. With these directions, the contempt case is closed. The pending applications, if any, shall stand closed. __________________________ V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J.

31st August, 2018.

Ak

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN Contempt Case No.2252 of 2018 31st August, 2018.

(Ak)