IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI CONTEMPT CASE No. 284 OF 2008 Between: Gajjala Gangamma and others ..... PETITIONERS AND Sri Hari Narayana and another .... RESPONDENTS Counsel for the Petitioners: Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI CONTEMPT CASE No. 284 OF 2008 O R D E R: This contempt case is filed alleging violation of an interim order dated 27.04.2007 passed by this Court in W.P.No.19107 of 2006 as under: “Having regard to the fact that the order of the Civil Court has become final, there shall be a direction to the respondents to deposit the decretal amount in L.A.O.P.No.281 of 1991 dated 23.9.1992 on the file of the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Rayachoty, to the credit of the Execution Petition, on or before 10.5.2007. Post on 5.6.2007, by which date the learned Government Pleader shall report compliance.” Subsequently, the main writ petition was disposed of on 17.01.2008 observing that in the light of the interim order dated 27.04.2007, no further orders were required to be passed. In response to the notice ordered, the Special Deputy Collector SSP Unit IV, Rajampet filed a counter affidavit in the contempt case stating that a sum of Rs.1,70,995/- was already deposited on 25.04.1996 and a further sum of Rs.40,747/- was deposited on 13.03.2008. It is also explained that proposals were submitted for payment of the balance of Rs.2,70,838/- and as soon as the sanction is accorded, the same would be deposited to the credit of the execution petition. When the matter is taken up for consideration, it is represented by the learned Government Pleader on instructions that the said sum of Rs.2,70,838/- has also been deposited to the credit of E.P. on 24.04.2008. Though the said fact has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is contended that the amounts so paid is not in full satisfaction of the award in favour of the petitioners. Such a disputed question cannot be enquired into and decided by this Court in Contempt proceedings. Hence, the petitioners are permitted to file a calculation memo in E.P.No.7 of 2005 in L.A.O.P.No.281 of 1991 with regard to the further amounts, if any due to them. Thereafter, the learned Senior Civil Judge, Rayachoty shall pass appropriate orders after giving an opportunity of hearing to both the parties, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of eight weeks from the date of filing of the calculation memo. Accordingly, the Contempt Case is disposed of. No costs. ____________ G. ROHINI, J Date: 23.04.2010 Ivd