Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 44334 (AP)

M/S.PURPLE TALK INDIA PVT LTD v. SRI SHAMSHEER SINGH RAWAT

CC/5427/2023 · 2025-04-24

Ravi Cheemalapati

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 5427 OF 2023 Petition under Sections 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act 1971 to punish the respondents herein for willfully violating and disobeying the orders of the High Court dated 05.07.2023 in WP No. 14700 of 2023 Between: M/s. Purple Talk India Pvt Ltd, 12th Floor, Watermark Technopark, Whitefield, Kondapur, Hyderabad, Telangana, Rep. by its authorized person Chandrasekhar Appe, S/o. Late Krishna Moorthy Appe ...Petitioner AND Sri Shamsheer Singh Rawat, The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary, Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi Guntur District 1. 2. Sri Dr. Sekhar Babu Geddarn, The Andhra Pradesh State Agra Industries Development Corporation Ltd.(A.P.S.A.I.D.C.LTD), Rep. by Its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, 5/1A, Ground Floor 1862, First Floor 101, Prime Hill Crest, Beside DGP Office, Vaddeswaram Village, SRO Mangalagiri, Guntur District 3. Smt M. Padmavathi, The General Manager, The Andhra Pradesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd. (A.P.S.A.I.D.C.LTD) , 5/ 1A, Ground Floor 1852, First Floor 101, Prime Hill Crest, Beside DGP Office, Vaddeswaram Village, SRO Mangalagiri, Guntur District ...Respondents A Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. K RATHANGA ., . \ . fl^uns^l for the Respondents: '^^4' i0:' Counsel for the Respondents: SRI P SHASIVARDHAN The Court made the following order: PANI REDDY /, • SMT S NISCHALA REDDY n V 1^; 'i APHC010491992023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3332] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY FIFTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAVI CHEEMALAPATI CONTEMPT CASE NO: 5427/2023 Between; ...PETITIONER M/s.purple Talk India Pvt Ltd AND ...CONTEMNOR(S) Sri Shamsheer Singh Rawat and Others Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.K RATHANGA PANI REDDY Counsel for the Contemnor{S); 1.S NISCHALA REDDY 2. P SHASHI VARDHAN 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 05.07.2023 passed in W.P.No.14700 of 2023. Sri K.Naga Phanindra, learned counsel representing Sri K.Rathanga Pani Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the orders of this 2. Court, disobedience of which is complained of in this Contempt Case has been complied with and prayed to close the contempt. 3. Recording the said submission, the Contempt Case is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications, pending if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- E KAMESWARA RAO JOINT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. Sri Shamsheer Singh Rawat, The State of Andhra Pradesh, Rep. by its Secretary. Finance and Planning Department, Secretariat, Velagapudi, Guntur District 2. Sri Dr. Sekhar Babu Geddarn, The Andhra Pradesh State Agra Industries Development Corporation Ltd.(A.P.S.A.I.D.C.LTD), Rep. by its Vice Chairman and Managing Director, 5/1A First Floor 101, Prime Hill Crest, Beside Ground Floor 1862 DGP Office, Vaddeswaram Village, SRO Mangalagiri, Guntur District 3. Smt M. Padmavathi, The General Manager, The Andhra Pradesh State Agro Industries Development Corporation Ltd 1A, Ground Floor 1852, First Floor 101 ■ (A.P.S.A.I.D.C.LTD), 5/ Prime Hill Crest, Beside DGP Office, Vaddeswaram Village, SRO Mangalagiri, Guntur District 4. One CC to Sri. K Rathanga Pani Reddy Advocate [OPUC] 5. One CC to Smt. S Nischala Reddy Advocate [OPUC] Shasivardhan Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri. P 7. Three CD Copies MVR GSC HIGH COURT DATED:25/04/2025 ORDER CC.No.5427 of 2023 ^ 0 7 AUG 2025 >sCl!mntS«Uo|.x;^ ACS CLOSING THE CONTEMPT CASE