IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAV THURSDAY, THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 641 fi OF 909^ 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 pleased to punish the respondent for their violation of the statement submitted through R.No.807/A3/2023 dated submitting before this court that the transactions with willful and deliberate 26.09.2023 regard to the disputed on hold until further vehicle AP 31 TH 8467 and AP 7558 will be kept orders of the court and making believe that no necessary interim orders be passed on the date and violating the Wder dated.19/9/2023 in WP 24517/2023 same by registering the registratiornoSrtfficate with regard to the disputed vehicle IS concerned on 30.10.2023 which jtself is.contempt of court Act. Between: Vishakapatnam. 'at Bhamidipati Residency, Butchirajupalem, f ^ 'itH v'-'V- -'■f;, ...PETITIONER(S) : AND Ratnam, S/o. Not known to the Petitioner Hindu Aaed about an : Transport^epaffilt, ...RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioner(s):SltLM K ASHORE Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following: REDDY ;j.,. - > f.-v i ' A PtiCOIOt01:952023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] THURSDAY ,THE EIGHTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURBLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 6415/2023 Between: Pediredia Sashikumar ...PETITIONER AND Dr G C Raja Ratnam and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: ...CONTEMNOR(S) 1.AKKISHORE REDDY Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. The Court made the following: ORDER: This Contempt Case is filed under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for the willful disobedience of the orders dated 19.09.2023 passed in W.P.No.24517 of 2023. On 19.09.2023, the following order has been passed: W.P.No.24517 of 2023 Notice before admission. Sri Ashok Ram, learned Government Pleader for Transport takes notice for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take out personal notice on respondent No. 4 through registered post with acknowledgment due and file proof of service in the Registry. s Heard Sri A.K.Kishore Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ashok Ram, learned Government Pleader for Transport for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, though the petitioner has raised objection for transferring his vehicles, the transport authorities, contrary to Rules, are trying to issue registration certificate in favour of the 4th respondent. The registered owner has to give his digital thumb Impressions before the concerned authority in Form-35 for transferring the vehicles In the name of others. The petitioner had never given his digital thumb impressions as required. However, the authorities are contemplating to issue Registration Certificates by transferring the vehicles of the petitioner In the name of the 4^^ respondent. On the other hand, Sri Ashok Ram, learned Government Pleader, by placing the written instructions dated 19.09.2023 on record, submitted that, consequent to the representation of the petitioner requesting to stop transfer of ownership of the vehicles, the authorities have issued notices to the registered owner (petitioner) as well as the buyer (4^^ respondent) requiring them to attend on 13.09.2023 to put forth their claims. Accordingly, the petitioner, 4th respondent and a representative of Tata Motors Finance Limited attended and put forth their versions. Thereafter, they were instructed to submit their written representations within a week for taking further action and till then all the transactions of the vehicles were kept In hold. The petitioner, instead of submitting his written version, has filed this writ petition in a posthaste manner. If the petitioner submits his written version to the Deputy Transport Commissioner, the authorities would pass appropriate orders by considering the contentions and counter contentions of the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent. Since all the transactions of the vehicles are kept in hold, there is no need for passing any interim orders. Perused the material available on record and the written instructions placed on record by the learned Government Pleader for Transport. The written instructions disclose that the petitioner and the 4th respondent were instructed to file their written representations . The petitioner is at liberty to file his written version before the concerned authority and thereupon the concerned authority shall pass appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law. The written instructions would further disclose that the authorities themselves have kept In hold all the transactions of the subject vehicles, there is no necessary for passing any interim orders at this stage. Post on 03.10.2023. In the meantime, counters, if any, by the respondents. \ A perusal of the above order shows that interim order. However, the petitioner Therefore, the contempt case is liable to be closed. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is closed. However, the petitioner liberty to pursue his case in the writ petition, which i There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous application this Court has not granted any can always pursue the writ petition is at IS pending consideration. s, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K TATA RAO DEPUT\^GISTRAR SECTION OFFICER Transport Depar^rel^tVishfk&a^Srh'ak^^^^^^^^^^^ years'!' Oco^^RiadT- and '‘T°Srt‘'^®0^rie Visakhapatnam District. ^ Officer (R.T.O.), Vishakapatnam 3. One CC to SRI. A K KISHORE 4. Two CD Copies //TRUE COPY// To, REDDY Advocate [OPUC] Pmg AL n r' i'. HIGH COURT DATED;08/05/2025 I ORDER CC.No.6415 of 2023 CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE