✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court

Contempt Case No. 825 of 2012 · High Court

Contempt Case No. 825 of 2012L NARASIMHA REDDY

Case at a glance

Bench
L NARASIMHA REDDY

Provisions considered

Judgment

The petitioner filed W.P.No.13719 of 2011 stating that the District Registrar, Narasaraopet, Guntur, did not take any steps on the representation submitted by him on 11.04.2011 against a Chit Fund

Company. The writ petition was disposed of on 08.02.2012 directing the respondent herein to consider the representation of the petitioner and take action in accordance with law. This Contempt Case is filed stating that the respondent did not abide by the orders passed by this Court. The respondent filed a counter affidavit. He stated that the enquiries made by him, in compliance with the orders passed by this Court, the petitioner is a defaulter in many chits and his dispute with the Chit Fund Company was basically civil in nature. It is also stated that the Assistant Registrar of Chits passed orders, dated 22.11.2011 and 8.12.2011, and there are no steps to be taken. Heard learned counsel the petitioner and learned Government Pleader for Revenue. The District Registrar, no doubt, is vested with certain powers under the Chit Funds Act, 1982. However, they are mostly in relation to structural and administrative aspects. The petitioner did not allege that any specific provision was violated by the District Registrar. In compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the respondent and his subordinates have undertaken enquiry and in fact orders were also passed. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner filed W.P.No.8291 of 2012 feeling aggrieved by one such order. In this background, it cannot be said that there was any contempt on the part of the respondent. Hence, the Contempt Case is dismissed. ____________________________ L. NARASIMHA REDDY, J.

31.08.2012 KH

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. Contempt Case No. 825 of 2012). ← Search more judgments