Mayapur Shri Chaitanya Math v. Sri Parameswar Brahmachari

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 30.03.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Ms. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA Cont.P.Nos. 1668 and 1669 of 2012 Mayapur Shri Chaitanya Math Represented by its Acharya & General Secretary, B.P. Yati Maharaj Regd. Office at Nabadwip.P.O.

Nadia District- West Bengal Represented by Power of Attorney Sri Gurudas Babaji Maharaj Gurupitha B.K. Tapaswi Maharaj (died) now Maheswari Brahmachari is the Power Agent residing at Sri Ramanandha Goudiya Math Kovvur, Andhra Pradesh ... Petitioner in Cont.P.Nos. 1668 and 1669 of 2012 Vs Sri Parameswar Brahmachari residing at 'Sri Gaudiya Math'

75, Sri Gaudiya Math Road, Royapettah, Chennai- 14.

... Respondent Cont.P.Nos. 1668 and 1669 of 2012 Prayer: Petitions filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to issue notice to the respondent herein and punish him for defying and Contempt of Court of the orders of this Hon'ble Court dated 21.11.2011 passed in OA.Nos.751 and 752 of 2011 in CS.No.899 of 2004. 1/3

For Petitioner : Mr. N. Sathyamoorthi For Respondent : Mr. R. Yashod Vardhan, SC for Mr. Sundar Narayan C O M M O N O R D E R The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been appearing before this Court from 15.12.2020. However, this Court on reading of the Petition, by order dated 25.01.2021, had directed to issue statutory notice to the respondent, since the respondent counsel was also not appearing before this Court. Thereafter on 22.02.2001, the contemnor was present in the virtual Court and the learned counsel for the respondent who was lead by Mr.R. Yashod Vardhan, Senior Counsel, had sought time for filing their counter. Therefore, the matter was adjourned to 09.03.2021. Even on the said date, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Today, once again there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner, when the matter is directed to be listed.

2. The petitioner has taken out this petition alleging that the orders of this Court dated 21.11.2011 has been violated by the respondent herein. The reading of the order dated 21.11.2011 would indicate that this Court has appointed a Three Member Administrative Committee to run the Math. The petitioner before this Court is not a member of the Administrative Committee. 2/3

The order had clearly stated that in case of any dispute regarding the Math affairs, the majority decision of the members of the Administrative Committee would be final and binding. These Members of the Committee have not come before this Court alleging contempt of orders of this Court.

3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that now Justice Ms. Chirtra Venkataraman (Retd.) of this Court has been appointed as an Administrator.

4. Considering the fact that the petitioner has not appeared before this Court and proved the acts of contempt and also taking into account the fact that the petitioner is not a part of the Administrative Committee, no contempt has been made out of the orders of this Court dated 21.11.2012 and therefore the Contempt Petitions stand dismissed.

SD/- ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(COMM.CASES) mrn //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2021. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) from 25th day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing Certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

GS/02/07/2021 3/3