Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 1653 (MAD)

Vedantha Desikar Devasthanam rep. by its Trustees v. T. Subbaraman

2013-04-15

K.RAVICHANDRA BAABU, R.BANUMATHI

body2013
Judgment :- R. Banumathi, J. Alleging disobedience of the order in O.S.A.No.334 of 2011 dated 08.11.2011, Petitioner has filed the Contempt Petition. 2. Petitioner Devasthanam is represented by learned counsel Mr.S.Sathyanarayan. Respondents 1 to 5 are represented by learned counsel Mr.N.Anand Venkatesh. 3. 1st Respondent-T.Subbaraman, 2nd Respondent-Venkatramani and 4th Respondent-K.Sasidar are present in Court. 4. Insofar as 3rd Respondent-Rajalakshmi, affidavit of 3rd Respondent has been filed along with medical certificate (04.4.2013) stating that Rajalakshmi is aged 71 years and due to her age and health condition, she has been advised to take total bed rest and therefore, she is unable to attend to the Court. Having regard to the averments in the affidavit of 3rd Respondent and the medical certificate issued by Dr.Indu, N-1D, Klassik Comfort, 2nd Sector, HSR Layout, Bangalore dated 04.4.2013, the presence of 3rd Respondent-Rajalakshmi is dispensed with. 5. As stated by the Respondents in the Court on 01.4.2013, possession of the property has been handed over to the Petitioner Devasthanam on 04.4.2013. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner has made an endorsement in the Contempt Petition to the effect that possession has already been handed over to the Petitioner Devasthanam on 04.4.2013 by the Respondents. Learned counsel for Petitioner submitted that in view of the subsequent developments, Petitioner is not pressing the Contempt Petition and also made an endorsement to that effect. 6. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel for Petitioner, the Contempt Petition is dismissed as not pressed. No costs.