Madras High CourtCONT P/1871/2017closed

Satharam v. Jeyachandran Banu Reddy

2018-04-27Honourable Mr Justice M.M.Sundresh6 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 27.04.2018 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH Cont. Petition No.1871 of 2017 1.SATHARAM 2.SEETHARAM 3.A.THIRUPATHI 4.A.SUBBULAKSHMI 5.G.ARTHI 6.P.S.SANJIVKUMAR 7.K.KANTHZHI 8.M.MINIYAPPAN 9.M.ARULMURUGAN 10.K.SELVI 11.K.DURGADEVI 12.M.S.SUSHEELA 13.R.SARASWATHI 14.R.SUBRAMANIYAM 15.SURESHKUMAR 16.C.VENKATASAN

17. S.DHANALAKSHMI 18.V.SELVARAJ 19.M.MUNIYAPPAN

20. R.PALANISAMY 21.R.MURUGASAN 22.C.BHASKARAN 23.D.CHANDRAN 24.J.RAMUTHAI 25.K.NEEMA 26.K.MURUGASAN 27.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY 28.K.VELUSAMY 29.K.PERUMAL

30.A.THIRUPATHI 31.G.MUNNESWARI 32.AZHAGUVEL 33.P.KRISHNARAJAN 34.S.ANBUSELVI 35.P.RANGADURAI

36. S.BABY 37.K.SINDUJA 38.MARUDHACHALAM

39. S.RAJALAKSHMI 40.K.RAMAKRISHNAN 41.K.M.MANI 42.G.A.SURENDER 43.S.MUTHUSAMY 44.K.M.SIVAKUMAR 45.J.CHITRA 46.D.YUVARAJA 47.G.PARIMALAM 48.SOMASUNDARAM 49.P.RAVI 50.R.PALANISAMY 51.R.HARIKESHMEENA 52.S.PARIASAMY 53.C.THULASIMANI 54.SUBRAMANI 55.B.SENIVASA GOPAL 56.KUMAR 57.N.GOWRI 58.ATHENA 59.R.CHANDRASEKARAN 60.NAGARAJ 61.RUKMANI 62.S.SAROJA 63.RAJAMANAIKAM 64.R.RATHINAM 65.D.SAMPATHKUMAR 66.B.GIRIDHARAN

67.D.DAYANIDHI 68.V.MURUGAN 69.A.P.AMIRTHAM 70.M.K.KUMAR.

71.S.SARAVANAN 72.K.PALANISAMY 73.M.SURESHKUMAR 74.A.SIVALINGAM 75.T.BALAKRISHNAN 76.JOTHI ARUMUGAM 77.T.VINCENT 78.PREMALATHA 79.S.MARUTHAMUTHU 80.M.SAVITHRI 81.D.PARIASAMY 82.D.SARASWATHY 83.M.SUBRAMANIYAM 84.A.RAJAGOPAL 85.M.BHAGIYAM 86.C.GANESHANKER 87.P.KUMARAN 88.D.MAHASWARI 89.KALAVATHI 90.D.APPASAMY 91.RENUKADEVI 92.S.JOTHIMANI 93.SELVAMANI 94.M.RAMASAMY 95.G.MOHANRAJ 96.P.VEERASAMY 97.R.JOTHIPAUL

98. A.ARULMUGHAM 99.T.ARULMUGHAM 100.K.PALANIYAMMAL 101.K.NATRAJAN 102.G.BALAKRISHNAN 103.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN

104.P.SETHUMADHAVAN 105.N.SOUNDRRIYA 106.R.NANDAGOPAL 107.S.VELUMANI 108.R.GHANTHI .. Petitioners vs.

Jeyachandran Banu Reddy, The Tamil Nadu Housing Board rep. by its Managing Director, Nandanam, Chennai - 35.

.. Respondent Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act to punish the respondent for the wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.18821 of 2016 dated 28.03.2017.

For Petitioners..

No appearance For Respondent ..

Mr.B.Vivekavanan

ORDER

Alleging that the order of this Court dated 28.03.2017 in W.P.No.18821 of 2016 has not been complied with, the present contempt petition has been filed.

2.There is no representation for the petitioners. 3.Learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that a writ appeal has been filed in W.A.No.505 of2018 and an order of stay has been granted.

4.In view of the same, nothing survives for consideration in this contempt petition and the same stands closed.

SD/ ASSISTANT REGISTRAR(Commr.Cases) mmi //Certified to be true copy// Dated at Madras this the day of 2018. COURT OFFICER(O.S.) From 25th Day of September 2008 the Registry is issuing certified copies of the Orders/Judgments/Decrees in this format.

CO/28/05/2018.

One CC to Mr.Viveka Vanan, Advocate, SR.7039.