Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 17352 Mad
Judgement Date : 24 August, 2021
Cont.P.Nos.891 to 893 of 2017
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 24..08..2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.SUNDAR
Contempt Petition Nos.891 to 893 of 2017
Statco Infraprojects Pvt Ltd.,
Formerly known as Karismaa MEP Services Pvt. Ltd.,
Reprsented by Mr.Manoj K.Sheth
Flat-1-C, KG Spring Manor,
23, 1st Main Road, Sastrinagar,
Adayar, Chennai 600020.
... Petitioner in all three contempt petitions
.. Vs ..
1.M/s.KGS Consgtructions Limited,
Rep. By its Managing Director,
No.43, Besant Avenue Road,
Adayar, Chennai 600 020,
Also at No.63, Kamaraj Avenue 1st Street,
Adayar, Chennai 600020.
... Respondent in all three contempt petitions
Prayer in Cont.P.No.891 of 2017:- Petition is filed under Section 11 of The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the respondent for the willful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this court dated
http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.Nos.891 to 893 of 2017
06.02.2017 made in O.S.A.No.12 of 2017.
Prayer in Cont.P.No.892 of 2017:- Petition is filed under Section 11 of The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the respondent for the willful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this court dated 06.02.2017 made in O.S.A.No.13 of 2017.
Prayer in Cont.P.No.893 of 2017:- Petition is filed under Section 11 of The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, praying to punish the respondent for the willful and deliberate disobedience of the order of this court dated 06.02.2017 made in O.S.A.No.14 of 2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.Adithya Reddy for petitioner in all Cont. Petitions
For Respondent : Mr.K.Raja Srinivas for respondent in all Cont. Petitions
http://www.judis.nic.in Cont.P.Nos.891 to 893 of 2017
COMMON ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by M.SUNDAR,J.]
Alleging that the judgment of this court dated 06.02.2017 made in
O.S.A.Nos.12, 13 and 14 of 2017 has not been complied with, the
present contempt petitions have been filed.
2. It is submitted by Mr.Adithya Reddy, learned counsel for the
petitioner that the parties have arrived at a settlement. It is a contempt
petition and therefore, we do not propose to go into the terms of the
settlement. Suffice it to say that the parties have given quietus to the order
out of which the contempt arises.
3. In view of the above, contempt petition stands closed. Though
obvious it is made clear that any breach qua terms of the compromise will
leave the petitioner with the rights to come to this Court again by way of
contempt.
[M.M.S.,J] [M.S.,J]
24..08..2021
Index : yes / no
Speaking / Non Speaking Order
kmk
http://www.judis.nic.in
Cont.P.Nos.891 to 893 of 2017
M.M.SUNDRESH.J.
AND
M.SUNDAR.J.
kmk
Cont.P.Nos. 891 to 893 of 2017
24..08..2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!