ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON K PRAMEELA V/S SRI V VIJAYA RAMA RAJU AND ANOTHER

AMARAVATI, India, Feb. 25 -- Andhra Pradesh High Court issued the following order on Jan. 23:

1. On the alleged willful disobedience of the orders passed by this Court in W.P.No.21855 of 2007 dated 14.09.2009, the present contempt petition has been filed.

2. Heard Sri Balaji Medamalli, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Narasimha Reddy G.L, learned counsel for the respondents.

. While reiterating the contents of the affidavit, learned counsel for the petitioner contend that this Court, by its orders dated 14.09.2009, allowed the writ petition and directed that the properties purchased by the petitioner in sales conducted by Deputy Registrar of Cooperative Societies shall not be treated as assigned lands. Despite such direction, in the adangal, in Column No.6, the authorities are still showing the lands as AWD (assessed waste). In view of the same, the authorities have willfully disobeyed the orders of the Court and are liable for punishment.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that there is no specific direction given to the authorities in that regard and further the orders were passed by this Court in the year 2009, whereas the contempt has been filed in the year 2022; as such, the contempt is barred by limitation. Even otherwise, the authorities have deleted the subject lands from the prohibitory list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act on 03.01.2023. In view of the same, there is no contempt as alleged by the petitioner and the contempt petition is liable to be dismissed.

5. Perused the record and considered the submissions made by both the learned counsel.

6. Firstly, the subject writ petition was disposed of in the year 2009, whereas the present contempt petition has been filed in the year 2022, beyond the one year prescribed period of limitation. Further, the authorities have deleted the subject properties from the prohibitory properties list under Section 22-A of the Registration Act pursuant to orders passed by this Court. This Court did not issue any specific direction to the authorities either to delete the petitioner's property or to include the petitioner's name in the adangals. In view of the same, there is no contempt as alleged by the petitioner and the contempt case is liable to be dismissed.

7. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, Miscellaneous applications, if any, pending in the contempt case shall stand closed.

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.