Smt. M.Sreedevi, vs J.Yadagiri
2023 Latest Caselaw 1781 Tel

     THE HONOURABLE DR.JUSTICE G. RADHA RANI

               CONTEMPT CASE No.108 OF 2020

ORDER:

This Petition is filed under Section 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act,

1971 to punish the respondent herein who is the appellant in the Second Appeal

for deliberately and willfully flouting the orders of this Court in S.A.No.40 of

2019 dated 15.02.2019 passed by the Hon'ble Justice Sri B.Siva Sankara Rao.

2. The respondent herein filed S.A.No.40 of 2019 against the judgment and

decree dated 07.03.2018 in A.S.No.126 of 2018 dated 10.10.2018 passed by the

VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District

confirming the judgment and decree in O.S.No.466 of 2013 passed by the VII

Additional Senior Civil Judge, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District

3. This Court while dismissing the Second Appeal at the stage of admission

directed the respondent herein, who is the appellant - tenant in S.A.No.40 of

2019 to vacate the premises within 10 months time from the date of passing of

the judgment on 15.02.2019 i.e. by 30.11.2019 after recording an oral

undertaking of the counsel who requested for such time to secure alternative

accommodation and to deposit use and occupation charges of Rs.10,000/- from

01.01.2019 onwards in the bank account of the landlord till vacating the

premises by 5th of every succeeding month and to give an undertaking not to

Dr.GRR, J cc_108_2020

allow any third party into the premises and to vacate in the meantime, otherwise

liable for contempt. It was also made clear that the appellant - tenant should

not alter the premises and should not allow any third party and must vacate the

premises on or before the time granted and if failed to comply any of the

conditions, the appellant - tenant was liable for action to be initiated under

contempt of the court, without prejudice to the right of the respondent - tenant

after efflux of time fixed. The security deposit, if any, was directed to be

adjusted at the time of vacating the premises.

4. The petitioner filed an affidavit in support of the petition submitting that

the petitioner (landlord) issued a notice to the respondent on 18.11.2019

reminding the respondent for compliance of the orders of the court to vacate the

premises by 30.11.2019 but the same was returned with an endorsement "no

such person in the address", further though the period of 10 months granted by

this Court lapsed on 30.11.2019 itself, the respondent had not vacated the

premises. Further, in order to harass the petitioner, who was an old aged lady

of 76 years of age, the respondent filed an application in the Second Appeal

vide I.A.No.3 of 2019 seeking further 6 months extension. The act on the part

of the respondent amounts to contempt of the court order dated 15.02.2019.

The respondent was bent upon to harass the petitioner in all aspects and he had

no respect towards the orders of the court and was continuing in the property of

the petitioner inspite of the orders of the court and prayed the court to come to

Dr.GRR, J cc_108_2020

its rescue and to punish the respondent for not implementing the orders of the

court passed in S.A.No.40 of 2019 dated 15.02.2019.

5. Heard Ms.K.Pallavi, learned counsel for the petitioner. Notice was

served on the respondent and he was represented by the learned counsel Sri

Madiraju Srinivasa Rao.

6. The learned counsel for the respondent requested to post the matter after

vacation. But, however considering that he did not choose to file his counter

and was taking time only to prolong the matter without complying the orders of

this Court contrary to the undertaking given by him through his counsel to

vacate the premises within 10 months i.e. by 30.11.2019, but reported to be

continuing in the premises deliberately flouting the orders of this Court passed

in S.A.No.40 of 2019 dated 15.02.2019, wherein he was also warned that he

was liable for action to be initiated under contempt of court if not vacated the

premises by the said date. It is considered fit to allow the petition sentencing

the respondent to simple imprisonment for a term of six (06) months and to pay

a fine of Rs.2,000/- within four (04) weeks from today.

7. In the result, the Contempt Case is allowed sentencing the respondent to

simple imprisonment for a term of six (06) months and to pay a fine of

Rs.2,000/- within four (04) weeks from today.

Dr.GRR, J cc_108_2020

8. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions pending in this petition, if any, shall

stand closed.

_____________________ Dr. G. RADHA RANI, J 25th April, 2023 Nsk.