SUDHA AGRO OIL AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED v. DR N YUVARAJ
CC/3190/2025 · 2025-11-04
Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad
Contempt Petitionbody2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 54376 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 54376 (AP) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1
APHC010576532025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3328] WEDNESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3190/2025 Between:
1. SUDHA AGRO OIL AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LIMITED, REGD OFFICE AT 19-1-422,G RANGAMPET, SAMALKOTA, KAKINADA, EAST GODAVARI DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.RAMAKRISHNA EDUPUGANTI, S/O. RAJARAO, AGED ABOUT 67 YEARS, R/O. 19-1-389, SUDHA COLONY, PEDDAPURAM, KAKINADA.
...PETITIONER AND
1. DR N YUVARAJ, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE AND FOOD PROCESSING DEPARTMENT..
ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI.
2. SRI RAM PRAKASH SISODIA, SPECIAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
HANDLOOM AND TEXTILES, L AND C DEPARTMENT, AP SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI, AMARAVATHI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
3. SRI M ABHISHIKTH KISHORE, THE COMMISSIONER OF INDUSTRIES, STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH APIIC BUILDINGS, 8TH FLOOR, MANGALAGIRI, GUNTUR DISTRICT.
4. SRI M ABHISHIKTH KISHORE, THE CHAIRMAN AND DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE, COMMISSIONERATE OF INDUSTRIES, APIIC BUILDINGS, 8TH FLOOR, MANGALAGIRI,
2
GUNTUR DISTRICT.
5. SRI PEEYUSH KUMAR, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE ,2ND BLOCK ,1ST FLOOR, ROOM NO.287 , ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI.
...CONTEMNOR(S): Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. R V KOTESWARA PRASAD Counsel for the Contemnor(S):
1. The Court made the following:
ORAL ORDER:
Ms. S.L.N. Harika, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of Sri R.V. Koteswara Prasad, learned Counsel for the Petitioner, on instructions, seeks to withdraw this Contempt Petition with liberty to file a fresh Contempt Case due to the fact that certain mistakes have crept in.
2. Request granted.
3. Accordingly, this Contempt Case is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh Contempt Case, if so advised. No order as to costs.
4. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order.
______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 05.11.2025 Vns