Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2011 DAILYLAW 1220 (AP)

B. Lakshmana Rao v. Mr. Nadeem Ahmed

CC/877/2011 · 2026-04-05

Harinath N

body2011

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010201792011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3457] MONDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CONTEMPT CASE NO: 877/2011 Between: 1.B. LAKSHMANA RAO, S/O SAMBAYYA R/OD.NO.1-4-96, PEDDIPALEM KALLERU, ANANDAPURAM, VISAKHAPATNAM. ...PETITIONER AND 1.MR NADEEM AHMED, A.P. EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY LIMITED CHAIRMAN & MD VISAKHAPATNAM 2.MR P V V SATYANARAYANA, THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, OPERATION, EASTERN POWER DISTRIBUTION COMPANY OF A.P. LIMITED VISAKHAPATNAM. ...CONTEMNOR(S): Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit file herein the High Court may be pleased to to punish the respondent under section 1110 to 12 of the Contempts of Courts Act, for committing contempt of the orders of this hon'ble Court in WP No. 6525 of 2011 dt. 29-03-2011 passed byhon'ble JusticeSri Nooty Rama MohanaRao IA NO: 1 OF 2021 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to issue order or direction to delete the name of Respondent No.1 Sri Ahmed Nadeem, Chairman and Managing Director, APEPDCL (relieved on 24-06-2013 by way of transfer ) in CC.No.877 of 2011 dismiss the relief against him and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.RAMBABU KOPPINEEDI Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1.P ANAND SESHU (SC FOR APEPDCL) 2.METTA CHENDRA SEKHAR RAO The Court made the following: 2 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CONTEMPT CASE No.877 of 2011 ORDER: 1. It is submitted that Writ Petition No.6525 of 2011 was allowed by this Court by an order dated 19.04.2024. In view of the said order, nothing further survives for consideration in the present contempt proceedings. 2. Accordingly, this Court is of the considered opinion that nothing further remains for adjudication, the present contempt case stands closed. There shall be no order as to costs. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE HARINATH.N Date:06.04.2026 KGM 3 95 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE HARINATH.N CONTEMPT CASE No.877 of 2011 Date: 06.04.2026 KGM