Home / Supreme Court / Judgments / 2018 / Diary 10248

M. NARSINGA RAO v. SAJID QURESHI

Supreme Court of India | Diary 10248/2018

Status

ROP - of Main Case

Decided On

06-07-2018

Bench

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE and HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT

Petitioner

M. NARSINGA RAO

Respondent

SAJID QURESHI

Primary Holding

A contempt petition filed to enforce compliance with a Supreme Court order to vacate suit premises becomes infructuous and is liable to be dismissed when the alleged contemnor voluntarily complies by vacating the premises before adjudication.

PDF 1 PDF 2 PDF 3 Check another SC case

Full Judgment Text

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.859 OF 2018 IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)NO.24338 OF 2017 M.Narsing Rao . ..Petitioner VS. Sajid Qureshi ...Respondent/ Alleged Contemnor O R D E R Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the respondent has vacated the suit premises. If that be so, in our opinion the present petition is rendered infructuous. The contempt petition is, accordingly, dismissed as having become infructuous. ......................J. [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE] ......................J. [UDAY UMESH LALIT] New Delhi; July 6, 2018. 1

ITEM NO.59 COURT NO.10 SECTION XII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 859/2018 in SLP(C) No. 24338/2017 M. NARSINGA RAO Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAJID QURESHI Respondent(s)/ Alleged Contemnor (IN SLP(c) No. 24338 OF 2017 ) Date : 06-07-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE UDAY UMESH LALIT For Petitioner(s) Ch.Leela Sarveswar,Adv. Mr. Adish Kumar,Adv. Mr. Krishan Pal Mavi, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R The contempt petition is dismissed as having become infructuous in terms of the signed order. (ANITA MALHOTRA) (CHANDER BALA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER (Signed order is placed on the file.) 2

1 ITEM NO.57 COURT NO.11 SECTION XII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No. 859/2018 in SLP(C) No. 24338/2017 M. NARSINGA RAO Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAJID QURESHI Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION IN SLP(C) No. 24338 OF 2017 ) Date : 23-04-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Ch. Leela Sarveswar, Adv. Mr. Krishan Pal Mavi, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R 1) We are informed that service has been refused by the respondent. 2) By an order dated 22.09.2017, the Special Leave Petition was dismissed, and the respondent was given three months time to vacate the suit premises on furnishing the usual undertaking for this purpose. He has not furnished any such undertaking nor has he vacated the premises. Instead, in execution proceedings, he has put up three others, who now claim to obstruct the petitioner. As a result of which, this contempt petition has been filed. 3) We direct the Commissioner of Police, Hyderabad to send police personnel to go to the aforesaid premises and eject all persons found to be in possession there within a period of one week from today, and handover possession to the petitioner.

2 4) The Commissioner of Police or any person authorized by him shall submit a Report to this Court stating that the needful has been done in accordance with this order. 5) Stand over to two weeks. (R. NATARAJAN) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER (SH) BRANCH OFFICER

ITEM NO.11 COURT NO.8 SECTION XII-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CONMT.PET.(C) No.859/2018 in SLP(C) No.24338/2017 M. NARSINGA RAO Petitioner(s) VERSUS SAJID QURESHI Alleged Contemnor /Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION IN SLP(c) No. 24338 OF 2017) Date : 06-04-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K. AGRAWAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE For Petitioner(s) Mr. Ch. Leela S., Adv. Mr. A.U.S. Raju, Adv. Mr. Krishan Pal Mavi, AOR For Respondent(s) UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Issue notice returnable in two weeks. Dasti in addition is permitted. (ASHA SUNDRIYAL) (CHANDER BALA) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER

Search This Case

Supreme Court Resources

High Court Case Status

Check case status for High Courts across India