APHC010511162022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3208] THURSDAY,THE TWELFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH CONTEMPT CASE NO: 3897/2022 Between: 1. MR. K.SURENDRA KUMAR, S/O LATE K. MOGILAPPA SETTY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, AGRICULTURE, R/O KUMMARA STREET, PUTHALAPATTU VILLAGE 85 MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT' ...PETITIONER AND 1. MR Y VIJAYA BHASKAR, S/O Y. PICHAIAH, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, MANDAL TAHSILDAR, PUTHALAPATTU MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 2. S KHADAR VALLI, S/O MODIN SAHIB, MUSLIM, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-258N MUSLIM STREET, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 3. A RANJITH, S/O A. SHANMUGAM, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO.2-13, HARIJANA WADA, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 4. P SIVARAM, S/O PONNUSWAMY, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, R/O D.NO.2-25/8, HARIJANA WADA, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 5. T MEENA, W/O T. NAGARAJU, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-234, RAMAPURAM ROAD, NAGAIAH COMPLEX, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 6. A RANI, W/O MANJU NATH, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O 1-234, BESIDE SOCIETY OFFICE, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 7. T ASHA, W/O T. ANJI, HINDU AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-235, EDIGA VEEDHI, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 8. C VARALAKSHMI, S/O C. PURUSOTHAM, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-2, SIVALAYAM STREET, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR, DISTRICT. 9. P S MEENAKSHI, W/O P.S. UMAPATHI, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-2, SIVALAYAM STREET, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 10. S AISA, W/O S. SABBER, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 30 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-139/1T, SUGALA MITTA, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT. 11. V HARI KRISHNA, S/O V. SOKKALINGAM PILLAI, HINDU, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, R/O D.NO.1-202, BESIDE DANAMORAMMA GUDI, PUTHALAPATTU TOWN AND MANDAL, CHITTOOR DISTRICT ...CONTEMNOR(S): 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 summon and punish the respondent Nos.1 to 11 herein under the provisions of 10 to 12 of Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for their willful disobedience of the Order passed in I.A. No.1/2022 in W.P. No. 22160/ 2022, dt.25.07.2022 in the interest of justice and pass IA NO: 1 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to dismiss the Contempt Case against these respondents No. 2 to 11 in C.C.No.3897 of 2022 by recalling the order dated 25.04.2023 and pass IA NO: 2 OF 2023 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased Pleased to dispense with the presence of the respondent/contemnor no.2 to 11 in CC 3897/2022 order dt 25-04-2023 Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. A CHANDRAIH NAIDU Counsel for the Contemnor(S): 1. T BALASWAMI 2. T BALAJI The Court made the following Order: 1. This contempt case is filed against the respondents for willful disobedience of the Interim orders dated 25.07.2022 passed by this Court in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in W.P.No.22160 of 2022, wherein this Court has directed the respondents not to interfere with the possession of the petitioner in respect of the land to an extent of Ac.0.46 cents in Sy.No.693/2 of Puthalapattu village and Mandal, Chittoor district without following due process of law. Despite the said orders, the unofficial respondents allegedly interfered with the petitioner’s possession and continued construction on the subject land. 2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for respondents submitted that they have filed counter-affidavit, wherein they have stated that they are not interfering with the petitioner’s possession and have stopped construction on the subject land. 3. Although time was granted to the learned counsel for the petitioner to obtain and place the latest instructions, he was unable to provide any further instructions to dispute the submissions made by the respondents. 4. Considering the said submission, as there is no willful disobedience of the orders of this Court, the Contempt Case is closed. No order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall also stand closed. ___________________ JUSTICE D.RAMESH Date :12.03.2026 JLSR 236 THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE D RAMESH C.C. No.3897 of 2022 12.03.2026 JJLLSSRR