Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50110 (AP)

V.Vikram Reddy, v. M. Hari Narayanan

CC/2638/2022 · 2025-12-02

D Ramesh

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

APHC010400092022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] WEDNESDAY, THE THIRD DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2638/2022 Between: 1. V.VIKRAM REDDY,, S/O.LATE VALLIVEDU KRISHNA REDDY, AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, OCC . AGRICULTURIST, R/O. D.NO.1-1, VALLIVEDU VILLAGE AND POST, PAKALA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. M HARI NARAYANAN, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CHITOOR, CHITTOOR DISTRICT DISTRICT 2. AMARNADH, THE TAHSILDHAR, PULICHERLA MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT DISTRICT. 3. A CHANDRA SEKHAR, THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. G N P PAVAN KUMAR RAO, THE DISTRICT FOREST OFFICER, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 5. M DATTHATREYA, THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, BHAKRAPETA RANGE, EAST ZONE, TIRUPATHI DISTRICT. 6. PLR PROJECTS LTD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, 5TH FLOOR, ASTRA TOWERS, KOTHAGUDA POST, KONDAPUR, HITECH CITY, HYDERABAD 500084 ...CONTEMNOR(S): 2 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 respondents under the Contempt of Court Act for willful and deliberate disobedience of the orders passed in W.P.N0.16051 OF 2022 Dt.23.06.2022 and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. C SUBODH Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. D KASIM SAHEB 2. T BALASWAMI 3. V R N PRASHANTH The Court made the following: 3 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2638 of 2022 ORDER: This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the orders dated 23.06.2022 passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.16051 of 2022 wherein this Court has directed the respondent authorities not to dispossess the petitioner from the subject property without following due process of law. 2. After filing the Contempt Case, the petitioner is not able to place any further instructions with regard to the above said violation. As there are no subsequent complaints with regard to interference, the Contempt Case is closed. No costs. 3. Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed. __________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Dt: 03.12.2025 sj 4 99 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D.RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 2638 of 2022 Dt: 03.12.2025 sj