N.Karunakaran v. Gundu Rao

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.07.2023 CORAM: JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE Contempt Petition No.1452 of 2022 N.Karunakaran ... Petitioner Vs.

1.Mr.Gundu Rao Chief Retail Sales M/s.Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited Trichy Retail Territory, 1st Floor, "Raj Towers"

Near Kalaignar Arivalayam Karur Bye Pass Road Thiruchirappalli - 620 002.

2.S.Pari, Advocate Enrollment No.583/2001 S/o.Selvavinayagam 6/7, North Agraharam, Ganapathi Agraharam Post Papanasam Taluk Thanjavur District ... Respondents PRAYER: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondents for committing contempt of order of the Hon'ble High Court in W.M.P. No.10473 of 2022 in W.P. No.10849 of 2022 dated 27.04.2022.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.R.Lakshmanan For Respondents :

Mr.R.Sankaranarayanan, Addl. Solicitor General of India for Mr.V.Anand Natarajan for R1 Mr.A.Muthukumar, for R2

O R D E R

The petitioner has instituted W.P. No.10849 of 2022 inter alia against the fifth respondent/second respondent in the contempt petition. The allegation pertains to a working licence in dealing with the petroleum products with the fourth respondent. This court, vide its order dated 24.07.2022 has given the following directions:

"2. As the petitioner alleges that the licence in regard to the dealership of the bunk under the name and style of Sri Mahaganapathi Agency has been fraudulently obtained, let accounts be maintained to prevent any difficulty in regard to the factual aspect of the matter on a later juncture."

2. This petition is now filed for initiating contempt against the fourth respondent in the writ petition/first respondent in contempt petition.

3. There is no representation for the petitioner. 4.Thiru.R.Sankaranarayanan, learned Additional Solicitor General of India for the first respondent (fourth respondent in the writ petition) submitted that the duel is essentially between the petitioner and the fifth respondent in WP/second respondent herein, who is a private party. So far as the first respondent herein is concerned, he has been maintaining his accounts as directed by this court. This he has highlighted in paragraph 4 of his counter and has also circulated a copy of the accounts that he is maintaining.

5.This court wonders what is that order that is in violation. However since the petitioner is not before the court, this court dismisses the matter for default. 6.Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed for default. No costs. 21.07.2023 Asr Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order

N.SESHASAYEE, J., Asr 21.07.2023