Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 55712 (AP)

SRI VAISHNAVI SPINTEX INDIA PVT LTD v. N YUVARAJ

CC/3187/2025 · 2025-11-04

Gannamaneni Ramakrishna Prasad

Contempt Petitionbody2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 APHC010576522025 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: 3187/2025 Between: 1. SRI VAISHNAVI SPINTEX INDIA PVT LTD, REGD OFFICE AND FACTORY AT 221 KOLANAPALLI V KALLA M WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR REDDY RANGA BABU S/O. SRINIVAS, AGED 29 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO.8, SATYA HOMES, BABU GARI STREET, TANUKU, WEST GODAVARI DISTRICT ...PETITIONER AND 1. N YUVARAJ, SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, INDUSTRIES AND COMMERCE AND FOOD PROCESSING DEPARTMENT.. ANDHRA PRADESH SECRETARIAT, VELAGAPUDI. 2. SRI RAM PRAKASH SISODI, 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 Accordingly, this Contempt Case is dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Petitioner to file a fresh Contempt Case, if so advised.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