Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 75451 (MAD)

Sun TV Network Limited v. Mr. Narayanan Ramasamy

CONT P/2384/2025 · 2026-02-23

Abdul Quddhose

Transfer Petitionbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

CONT P No. 2384 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 23-02-2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE CONT P No. 2384 of 2025 Sun TV Network Limited Murasoli Maran Towers, 73, MRC Nagar Main Road, MRC Nagar, Chennai - 600 028, Rep. by its Authorised Signatory Mr.M.Jyothi Basu. Petitioner(s) Vs Mr. Narayanan Ramasamy Sole Proprietor - Sri Thendral Films, Regd. Office No.2/8, Eighty Feet Road, Devar Garden, Saligramam, Chennai - 600 093. Contemnor(s) PRAYER To punish the Respondent/Judgment Debtor for breach of its undertaking recorded in order dated 07.03.2025 in E.P.No. 13 of 2024 For Petitioner(s): Mr.Jose John for M/s. King and Partridge ORDER This contempt petition has been filed for the alleged disobedience of the undertaking dated 07.03.2025 given by the respondent, which was recorded by this Court in its order dated 07.03.2025 passed in E.P. No.13 of 2024. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CONT P No. 2384 of 2025 2.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent/judgment debtor did not vacate the premises, based on his undertaking dated 07.03.2025, which is recorded by this Court in its order dated 07.03.2025 passed in E.P. No.13 of 2024, which is the subject matter of this contempt petition but the respondent was evicted by orders passed in E.P. No.109 of 2025 filed by the petitioner. Therefore, he would submit that the respondent will have to be punished. 3.Since the respondent has already vacated the premises though not as per the undertaking given by the respondent before this Court, which was recorded by this Court in its order dated 07.03.2025 passed in E.P. No.13 of 2024, the respondent having been evicted from the very same premises by the petitioner, the question of keeping this contempt petition pending and taking action against the respondent does not arise. If the petitioner had suffered any loss on account of the delay on the part of the respondent to vacate the subject premises, the petitioner will have to take separate action against the respondent in the manner known to the petitioner under law. 4.Since the respondent has vacated the premises, this contempt petition is closed. Liberty is granted to the petitioner to take separate legal action against the respondent for the delay in vacating the premises and for initiating execution https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CONT P No. 2384 of 2025 petition to evict the respondent despite an undertaking given by the respondent to vacate the premises on his own. 23-02-2026 vga To 1.Mr. Narayanan Ramasamy Sole Proprietor - Sri Thendral Films, Regd. Office No.2/8, Eighty Feet Road, Devar Garden, Saligramam, Chennai - 600 093. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis CONT P No. 2384 of 2025 ABDUL QUDDHOSE J. vga CONT P No. 2384 of 2025 23-02-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis