V.Bodiyammal, v. Mrs. A.Monika, B.Tech.,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 24.02.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY V.Bodiyammal ... Petitioner Vs Mrs.A.Monika, B.Tech., The Sub-Registrar, Uthangarai Sub-Registrar Office, Krishnagiri.

... Respondent Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 praying to initiate Contempt of Court proceedings against the respondent herein for the non compliance of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No. 4074 of 2023 on 21.07.2023.

For Petitioner : Mr.I.Kanna Patel For Respondent : Mr.U.Bharanidharan Special Government Pleader 1/6

ORDER

The contempt petition has been filed complaining willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court on 21.07.2023 in W.P.No. 4074 of 2023.

2. Upon perusal of the material records of the case, it is made clear that the petitioner had approached the Revenue Divisional Officer, who is the authority under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007. The Revenue Divisional Officer passed an order cancelling the settlement deed vide its proceedings dated 24.01.2023. Aggrieved thereby, the children of the petitioner approached the District Collector by way of appeal and the Collector reversed the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer by order dated 24.01.2023. The petitioner challenged the order dated 24.01.2023 by way of W.P.No. 4074 of 2023. This Court found that no appeal could lie at the instance of the children and that the order of the District Collector was without jurisdiction and quashed the said order. It is, in this context, the present contempt petition is filed. 2/6

3. The order of the District Collector has already been quashed. Therefore, this Court had only directed the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent to ascertain the position from the SubRegistrar. Written instructions from the Sub- Registrar have now been placed before this Court. It can be seen that the entry relating to the cancellation of the document has already been made and the petitioner has further dealt with the property on her own. In view thereof, nothing further remains to be adjudicated or directed in the contempt petition.

4. Recording the facts that the petitioner's cancellation order has become final, as per the order in the writ petition and the petitioner is permitted to execute further documents based on the same, this contempt petition stands closed. No costs.

24.02.2025 3/6

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.

24.02.2025 4/6

Cont.P.No. 301 of 2025 D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.J., The matter is listed under the caption "for being mentioned" at the instance of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. In the original order dated 24.02.2025, proceedings date in the fifth line of the paragraph No. 2 is wrongly mentioned as 24.01.2023.

3. Accordingly, proceedings date in fifth line of the paragraph No. 2 shall be corrected as '22.02.2022' instead of 24.01.2023.

4. The Registry is directed to issue fresh order copy by carrying out the above correction.

11.03.2025 5/6

D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY.J., Cont.P.No. 301 of 2025 11.03.2025 6/6