IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.1823 of 2010 In LAAS MP.No.1016/2010 In LAAS.No.215 of 2010 Between: K.Narayan Reddy and 20 others ..... PETITIONERS AND K.Mallesham .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.ESWARAIAH & THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NOUSHAD ALI CONTEMPT CASE No.1823 of 2010 In LAAS MP.No.1016/2010 In LAAS.No.215 of 2010 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice V.Eswaraiah) This contempt case is filed complaining that the respondent has willfully and wantonly violated the orders of this Court passed in LAASMP.No.1016/2010 in LAAS.No.215/2010 dated 09.08.2010. It is stated that the petitioners herein are entitled to compensation for acquisition of their lands and as compensation amount was not paid, they filed E.P. Questioning the orders passed in LAOP the respondent filed appeal, and this Court made the following order dated 09.08.2010 at the instance of the respondent herein: “Heard both the counsel. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the market value at the rate of Rs.45,000/- per acre in respect of the acquired lands of the respondents. On reference, the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, Hyderabad, enhanced the compensation at the rate of Rs.4,00,000/-, Rs.3,50,000/- and Rs.3,00,000/- respectively for A, B and C category lands on the ground that the Government has already fixed compensation for similar lands. Aggrieved by the same, this appeal is filed contending that the Government has not agreed for awarding the said compensation on the aforesaid category of lands. Whether the compensation fixed by the Government in respect of the similar category of lands is also applicable to the lands of the respondents is a matter to be considered at the time of hearing of the appeal. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we grant stay of all further proceedings as prayed for, subject to the condition that the petitioner/appellant deposits 50% of the E.P.amount to the credit of E.P.No.37 of 2010 in O.P.No.253 of 2002 on the file of the III Additional Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, within eight weeks from today. Failing which, this order stands vacated. On such deposit, the respondents are entitled to withdraw the same without furnishing any security. The petition is accordingly disposed of.” It is stated that the above said conditional order is extended to comply with for eight more weeks by order dated 24.01.2011. However, if the order of this Court is not complied with, the remedy for the petitioner is to get the order passed in the E.P. to be executed. We are of the opinion that the contempt case for non-compliance of the orders passed in civil matters does not amount to contempt. The Contempt Case is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ V.ESWARAIAH,J _________________ NOUSHAD ALI,J Dated: 28.01.2011 Dsr