M/S.Ku Thermal Power Private Limited, v. Shanmugam
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN and THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI in W.P.(MD)No.16421 of 2024 M/s.Ku Thermal Power Private Ltd., Rep. by its Authorised Signatory, Mr.Marri Venkata Subba Reddy, Door No.4/112/6, K.T.C.Nagar, Tuticorin-2. ... Petitioner / Petitioner Vs.
1.Shanmugam General Manager / Authorized Signatory, M/s.Sembcorp Green Infra Pvt Ltd., Having its Registered Office at Building 7A, Level 5, DLF Cyber City, Gurugram-122002, Haryana & Having its Project Office at Madurai-Thoothukudi Bypass Road, Near Perumal Kovil, Valasamuthiram Village, Ottapidaram Taluk, Tuticorin.
1/4
2.N.Prakash Narayanan, S/o.Naryanan, Site Project Manager/Authorized Signatory, M/s.Excelltech Wind India Pvt., Ltd., Door No.4/319, Anupatty Road, Venkitapuram, Palladam-641 665, Tirupur District, currently posted at Ottapidaram Taluk, Tuticorin District ... Contemnors / Respondents 4 & 5 Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, to punish the contemnors for their willful disobedience to the interim injunction order dated 23.07.2024 made in W.M.P. (MD)No.14229 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)No.16421 of 2024 of this Court. For Petitioner : Mrs.N.Krishnaveni Senior Counsel for Mr.P.Thiyagarajan For Respondents : Mr.T.Antony Arulraj
ORDER
Heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the contemnors. 2/4
2. The petitioner contends that the order of interim injunction granted by this Court in W.M.P.(MD)No.14229 of 2024 in W.P.(MD)No. 16421 of 2024 on 23.09.2024 has been breached by the contemnors. The contemnors have filed an affidavit of apology. In the said affidavit, they have categorically stated that they did not receive any communication about the interim order granted by this Court. We wanted to know from the petitioner if any notice by registered post or by e-mail was sent to the contemnors about the grant of interim order.
3. The learned senior counsel would state that the contemnors were aware of the interim order and that they were orally instructed by the jurisdictional Tahsildar also. But in the absence of any definite proof regarding communication of the interim injunction, we are not inclined to entertain the contempt petition. The contempt petition is closed. [G.R.S., J.] [B.P., J.] 26.09.2024 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No rmi 3/4
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J and B.PUGALENDHI, J.
rmi in W.P.(MD)No.16421 of 2024 26.09.2024 4/4